Results tagged “NBC” from The Mayor of Television

In the past, networks showing off their wares at TV Press Tour have treated the hard-working journalists covering the event to sumptuous buffets of food like this:

But with this sorry economic downturn, this Press Tour - which the Washington Post's Lisa de Moraes has taken to calling the "I Think I'll Just Take Some of These Dinner Rolls to Feed My Hungry Children Winter TV Press Tour 2009" - the spreads have looked more like this:

NBC's even trimming costs by not bothering scheduling an entire day of press conferences and avoiding having their big guns, co-chairmen Ben Silverman and Marc Graboff, give a press conference. Instead, they've trotted out primetime entertainment executive Angela Bromstad and reality guy Paul Telegdy, who can dodge the tougher questions about NBC's woes; as Telegdy puts it, "We're here to talk about TV shows rather than corporate changes."

It kind of feels like a cheap overseas knockoff of a Press Tour session. With, probably, unhealthy levels of lead paint.

So here's the news: Bromstad thinks, "We still have some amazing quality shows on the air" and "Knight Rider" and "Kath & Kim" are "fair tries." They're "thrilled" to have Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien on the network. The network has still not officially cancelled "Lipstick Jungle." And they've added three more episodes of the final season of "ER," because, you know, why not. Bromstad kind of dances around what kind of programming she likes, pretty much settling on whatever's good. "You have to have a strategy," she explains. "We have to have quality and we have to have the ratings."

Pretty revolutionary notions, I'm sure you'll agree. As press conferences go, it's a fair try.

I sat down on Monday with Eric McCormack and Tom Cavanaugh, two stars from NBC's heydays who will soon be starring on TNT's upcoming series "Trust Me," which is a show you'd think NBC executives would kill their young to have on its air today.

McCormack won an Emmy for his long-running hit show "Will & Grace;" Cavanaugh was the critically acclaimed titular star of "Ed." Those shows aired back when NBC had loads of good shows. I asked them what they made of the network's fortunes these days. They didn't directly address the fact that NBC will soon be airing a talk show starring Jay Leno in five hours of prime time soon, but, well, you got the sense of sorrow for a network's former greatness.

Cavanaugh: I have to be careful, because the reason I'm on this show is because I was on NBC. My profile, you know, the fact that I have any profile at all is because I did 'Ed' on NBC. And so, they've given me so much. While I was there, they were the undisputed rock and roll kings. It's difficult to watch what's going on there now. At the same time, everything's cyclical. The best thing to answer that is to say is, it's great to be on TNT. (goes on to say lovely things about TNT which aren't just B.S., including:) Their plan seems like a simple business model: We're going to pick some shows that we think are good, we're going to shoot those pilots, and if we're right, we're going to pick up a few of them and try to see them through.

McCormack: It was a wonderful place to be. With 'Will & Grace,' we were automatically Must-See TV, we were surrounded by greatness. And they were great to me. And it is sad to see that it's changed so much, but not just for NBC, but for all of (the broadcast networks). It's a very different game for them. They're having to play a different game now.

Cavanaugh: "Having." They're "having?"

McCormack: I don't know. I remember when we were a couple of years into "Grace," and (NBC-Universal top dog) Jeff Zucker was the last guy who wanted to do reality. And we were all, like, proud of him that he held back and then one day he had to give in because reality was what everyone seemed to want. We all thought reality would go away within two years - it hasn't, it's become bigger than ever. And now, NBC is doing more reality than anyone.

Tonight, NBC unveiled - well, um - something about its new late-night show, "Late Night With Jimmy Fallon." Fallon, best known for laughing at his own jokes on "Saturday Night Live," takes over for Conan O'Brien March 2, 2009, who takes over for Jay Leno in June. (Leno, as you may have read in the previous entry, will be heading to NBC primetime, hosting a show very similar to the one he's doing now and saving NBC boatloads of money on development and production and, even more importantly, saving them from the ignominy of getting Conan's butt kicked had Leno moved to ABC or Fox.)

Nothing really of a whole lot of value in that, except that Fallon introduced his house band, The Roots. He's going to be doing one of these nightly until his show launches. Two suggestions: 1) Why not actually try to show the creative process involved (assuming there is one), and 2) Would it kill you to include a few jokes?

This is one of the reasons reporters are in a constant state of exasperation with network executives: Today, NBC abruptly calls a press conference for an "organizational announcement." Given that earlier in the day, NBC-Universal uberlord Jeff Zucker had floated the notion of scaling back the network's number of hours of primetime programming - "Can we continue to broadcast 22 hours in primetime? Three of our competitors don't. Can we continue to broadcast seven days a week? One of our competitors doesn't" - we anxiously rearranged our schedules and phoned in, awaiting the big news.

Which, of course, wasn't big news at all, just an executive shuffle that Variety had already reported on. (One of the new executives executive produced "Grease: You're the One That I Want" and "I'm with Stupid" for NBC and "Viva Laughlin" for CBS, proving that if nothing else, he was a courageous man for allowing such failures to remain on his resume.) It was delivered in typical lipstick-on-a-pig fashion, referring to the 500 layoffs at NBC Universal as "right-sizing" the network, and that by "eliminating layers of bureaucracy," NBC was poised to become the "most-talent-friendly organization," because they no longer had anyone around the office with the time or inclination to give show-runners notes on their shows.

(Be sure to use lots of brown!)

So while we were listening to this folderol, Bill Carter was off chasing the real story: NBC actually is kind of ceding its primetime schedule - they're going to give Jay Leno the 10 p.m. hour Monday through Friday. It's, if not win/win, at least win/not-lose-too-much for NBC, who had already promised Conan O'Brien Jay's 11:30 p.m. timeslot five years ago: They keep Jay (and, perhaps more importantly, ABC or Fox don't get Jay), and they get five hours of incredibly cheap (if, probably, fairly low-rated) primetime programming.

But, of course, NBC Entertainment co-chairs Ben Silverman and Marc Graboff didn't mention this. (They will tomorrow, though.) Graboff was asked about Zucker's talking up cutting back primetime, and replied, I haven't seen the comments. (Then he was probably the only person on the phone call who hadn't.) "We're looking at everything [we can to] keep the broadcast network single-revenue stream viable in this economy." The typical non-answer answer.

Also, I think I figured something out about Ben Silverman: Whenever he's lying or just can't or doesn't want to answer a question, he starts jabbering away in industry jargon and keeps saying the same thing over and over.

For example: Asked about NBC's crummy fall, Silverman replied, "We need to be patient. Patience is really where we need to be ... we need to continue to be patient."

But not as patient as the people who have to listen to him speak.

CBS and ABC announced their midseason plans yesterday; NBC dragged its feet and waited until today, but they still don't know how they're going to fill some of their timeslots or where they'll put some new shows.

(That didn't last long.)

NBC has the Super Bowl this year, so they've given that highly prized post-game slot to ... hmm. An hourlong episode of "The Office," which is already doing pretty well by NBC standards and wouldn't seem to need that kind of promotional bump. As opposed to, say, its new show "Kings" or something.

Ben Silverman, co-chairman of NBC Entertainment, enthused, press-release style, "The biggest event on television (that would be the Super Bowl, not the Jan. 16 return of "Friday Night Lights"), will provide the perfect promotional platform as we launch some of the most eagerly anticipated new and returning shows on any schedule." (Emphasis mine.)

Unfortunately, the next paragraph in the press release discusses "Chuck" (about 6 million viewers weakly weekly) and "Heroes" (down more than any other show this season). Which only fuels those rumors about what he's allowing into his system.

So here're the random new shows and stunts NBC's offering come 2009:

* "Kings," starring "Deadwood's" Ian McShane as a powerful ruler in a mythical country who lives in "a clean new city that is unspoiled by time or litter." A guy in a neighboring country is the David to his Goliath. It premieres with a two-hour debut Thursday, March 19 at 9 p.m. before settling into its 10 p.m. timeslot the following week.

* On Monday, Feb. 2, "Chuck" returns with a 3-D episode, "Heroes" starts a new storyline and "Medium" returns.

* "VIII," a miniseries starring Val Kilmer and Stephen Dorff with a whiff of "The Bourne Identity" about it and involving the assassination of America's first female President and a conspiracy to overthrow the entire government, airs Sunday, Feb. 8 and 15 at 9 p.m.

* "ER" goes away for good with a two-hour series finale Thursday, March 12 at 9 p.m. Half of those tuning in will be doing so just to see if George Clooney makes an appearance.

* "Knight Rider" goes away (maybe for good) Feb. 25 at 8 p.m.; NBC isn't sure what they'll put in that timeslot yet.

* "Celebrity Apprentice" returns Sunday, March 1 with a two-hour episode at 9 p.m., because, you know, why not.

NBC also has a couple of shows - "The Philanthropist," which has, like other new NBC shows, endured some show-runner woes, and the tantalizingly titled "The Untitled Amy Poehler Project," from "The Office's" brain trust (though this isn't the "Office" spinoff that was promised earlier in the year) - that they don't know what they're going to do with at this point.

(Amy Poehler is enthusiastic about starring on an NBC primetime series. Wouldn't you be?)

Hard to say which is the worse news for NBC: the fact that it has canceled "My Own Worst Enemy" and "Lipstick Jungle" for lousy ratings, or the fact that it has given full-season pickups to "Knight Rider," "Life" and "Kath & Kim" despite lousy ratings. "Crusoe" shouldn't be feeling too good about itself at this point (though, since it's a British co-production, NBC's not paying as much for its lousy ratings), and it's not like "Friday Night Lights" will punch up the network's fortunes when it returns mid-season.

(NBC has hired Diogenes to search for an honest-to-goodness hit show.)

And an informal AOL poll (is there any other kind of online poll aside from informal?) finds that if Tina Fey's not going to be reaming Sarah Palin on "Saturday Night Live," then viewers aren't going to be showing up, either: 50% said they're outtathere. A quarter said they'd still watch (pity those squalid, miserable lives) and another quarter said, "Eh, maybe."

Sad thing is, "SNL's" Palin parodies were pulling way more viewers than just about anything on NBC's primetime schedule.

*

Tomorrow on "Good Morning America," ABC's Chris Cuomo will interview William Ayers, the former member of the '60s radical group the Weatherman that Sarah Palin would have you believe has not changed one whit from those days and is still skulking about free in Chicago just waiting for his good pal Barack Obama to pop by so they can go lobbing bombs at "the real America." They'll discuss why he didn't try to hog a lot of camera time during the campaign like Joe the Plumber.

(What kind of photo of Bill Ayers is this? This isn't going to scare anyone!)

(That's more like it!)

So, "Life:" Not to be found on NBC's Friday schedule anymore. Instead, beginning on Halloween, "Lipstick Jungle" will take over the 10 p.m. slot. Beginning on Nov. 5, "Life" will be resurrected Wednesdays at 9 p.m., followed by season 328 of "Law & Order."

(As much as these gals enjoy oiling up one another's calves and getting all frisky/friendly, expect this to be pretty much the last mention ever of "Lipstick Jungle" on this blog.)

NBC Entertainment co-chairmen Ben Silverman and Marc Graboff declared, apparently speaking in unison, "These moves will play to the shows' mutual strengths and will help us to reinforce our lineup. A Wednesday night with wall-to-wall satisfying mysteries and great dramas - paced by the return of the original 'Law & Order' to its home on Wednesdays - will provide creative continuity that night. Fridays will feature escapist drama with 'Lipstick Jungle' joining 'Crusoe.'"

Well, this might help "Life" a little (or a lot) more than it'll help "Lipstick Jungle:" Getting bounced to the Siberia of Fridays is just a step away from getting bounced to the no-man's-land of Saturdays, as "America's Toughest Job" can attest (like, 18 people watched its finale last Saturday).

Also, NBC has pushed back its premiere of "Momma's Boys" - a reality-dating show produced by Ryan Seacrest in which moms help their sons pick their romantic partners (just the description of this one tells you all you need to know, right? you don't actually have to watch this train wreck) - a couple of weeks, to Tuesday, Dec. 16 at 10 p.m., before taking over its regular timeslot 9 p.m. Mondays (replacing "Heroes," but only briefly) on Dec. 22.

("My little Randy here has all the love he'll ever need - why would he need to go looking for affection in the arms of a brazen trollop?")

"This strategy for 'Momma's Boys' offers the show a more favorable launch platform," Silverman/Graboff intoned in another stellar synchronized speaking performance.

Except for the fact that pretty much no show has launched successfully in the month of December, when everyone's busy with holiday plans. Still, it sounds good, particularly when the time comes to tell Seacrest, "Ryan, we did everything we could for your show, but that pesky Oedipal Complex just proved too skeevy for our viewers..."

So yesterday, NBC breathlessly releases this media alert:

"Tina Fey is doing a 30 minutes conference call this Friday, October 24th at 10:00 a.m. pacific time (adjust to your time zone) to talk about the upcoming season of '30 Rock.' I know that we'll have a great deal of interest in the call, but please remember that this is a '30 Rock' call...not a 'Saturday Night Live' call."

I'm guessing this met with one of those occasional instances of TV-journalist pushback, with everyone basically saying, "WTF? Tina goes on the TeeVee and makes fun of that Sarah Palin for not giving straight answers to legitimate news questions, you betcha, and now you're not going to let Tina answer legitimate news questions about that Sarah Palin? Let us express our righteous umbrage!"

(This is either Tina Fey or Sarah Palin. I forget which. If the clothes are expensive, it's Palin.)

So, today, NBC issues this tasty morsel:

"Unfortunately, due to last minute production scheduling changes, we have to postpone Friday's conference call with Tina Fey. I will be in touch soon to reschedule the call within the next few weeks."

Translation: We'll do it sometime after Election Day, when that whole Sarah Palin thing will be a moot point.

(This is the other one, responding to NBC's latest press alert.)

To promote its upcoming series "Crusoe," NBC has installed a treehouse in Manhattan, in the middle of the Theater District. Perhaps they'll install a few trees there, as well.

"This treehouse is our effort to bring a piece of the remote outdoors adventure to the U.S.," said some NBC guy paid to speak in press-release-ese. "We couldn't think of a better place to draw attention to the Crusoe story than smack in the middle of New York City." Maybe they should've thought harder?

So that the rest of us can behold this spectacle, NBC's live-streaming it online. (Ironically, the site's name is the one fans'll want when NBC cancels the show: savecrusoe.com.) I visited the site this afternoon, and was treated to thrilling images of a guy in old-timey garb sitting and reading a book, then getting bored and wandering off, outside the webcam's purview.

Since he's, you know, roughing it and all, maybe he stepped out of frame to grab a drink at the Sheraton Manhattan Hotel, which is on the same corner as his little publicity stunt. Or maybe he went to get tickets for "Wicked," playing at the nearby Gershwin Theatre. Whatever he's up to, I hope he stays safe - Manhattan's a jungle.

Upon the conclusion of this stunt on Friday, when the show premieres, CNBC plans to take over the treehouse and use it as a diorama of what kind of living conditions citizens can expect once the economy finally craters.

Honestly, NBC needs to take that bullet magnet out of its shoes so they quit shooting themselves in the foot. Right now, with Tina Fey, they have the hottest star on TV - she won those three Emmys last month for "30 Rock" and her Sarah Palin impersonation is the season's biggest success story (even if she'd rather live on the moon than capitalize on it past November - see entry below).

So, you know, strike while the iron's hot and all that? At NBC, not so much.

Despite Feymania, NBC declined to push up its premiere date for Season Three of "30 Rock," which was and is and will always be Oct. 30. Right now, special primetime Thursday editions of "SNL" are camping out in "30 Rock's" timeslot (9:30 p.m.) and, in fact, the first lured almost twice as many viewers as "30 Rock" manages, even without Fey's participation.

But one wonders - if NBC really wants to cajole viewers into making "30 Rock" a hit, why wouldn't they be bringing it back in a slightly more urgent fashion? A nation hungry for its Tina Fey would've tuned in and maybe even discovered just how funny her full-time day job really is, but already, any heat off its Emmy wins has dissipated, and the show will be back just in time for Fey to have hung up her Palin eyewear for good.

Ben Silverman, one of the two best co-chairmen of NBC Entertainment the network has these days, told the New York Times, "If we knew then what we know today about how hot Tina was going to be, would we do it differently? Maybe."

Maybe? Why not just say, "Would we do it differently? Nah, because here at NBC we can't think on our feet sufficiently to react to an occasional splash of good fortune and besides, we don't care about stuff like getting people to watch our best show."

Obviously, NBC was in a bit of a jam, because it's tough if not suicidal to tinker with a launch of a new show ("Kath & Kim," at 8:30 p.m.) with which you terrorized viewers with ubiquitously unfunny promos during the Olympics. But there are a couple of ways they could've at least tried:

1) Jettison "My Name is Earl" (which, I think we'll agree, is close to over) at 8 p.m. for a couple of weeks and put the "SNL" specials there - this way, they get a stronger lead-in with which to introduce "Kath & Kim" and can heavily cross-promote "30 Rock" in between debate sketches and Weekend Update one-liners.

2) Push "SNL" to 10 p.m., after "30 Rock" (Since "ER's" final season is truncated anyway, it's not going to be hurt too much by a small delay) and pad the episodes out to an hour with classic old political clips or musical guests or, well, anything.

Or, you can do nothing and hope for the best, which seems to be NBC's plan in general.

Today, I've been turning the scalpel (or the hatchet, take your pick) on myself, reviewing my own reviews that appeared in today's paper. This installment: NBC's "Kath & Kim."

Clueless idiocy can be the stuff of inspired comedy - it's been done from the kids' show "Spongebob Squarepants" to the not-for-kids show "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia."

The trick is to make characters who are something less than human somehow likable, somehow relatable, or at least convey to viewers that there's a reason you're devoting such energy to telling these clowns' stories. NBC's new sitcom "Kath & Kim," based on a hit Australian sitcom, doesn't manage this. So unless you subscribe to particularly rarefied tastes, you'll likely wonder how this got on the air in the first place.

It's not the fault of the stars. Molly Shannon gives her all as Kath, who has survived years of catering to her utterly spoiled daughter Kim (Selma Blair) and has found happiness with the cloddish owner of a mall fast-food restaurant named Phil Knight (John Michael Higgins). (The real Phil Knight, of course, is considerably less negligible, as he co-founded Nike.)

Kim, on the other hand, is a handful and then some. She returns home pouting, because her husband suggested she pop a couple of frozen dinners in the microwave. "I didn't sign up for cooking dinner or being interested in how someone's day was - I'm a trophy wife," she fumes.

It'd take a particularly deft performer to make a character that monumentally self-absorbed remotely appealing, and Blair's not up to the task.

Complicating the situation is the fact that both Kath and Kim have epochally tacky taste in, well, everything. One would have to be really tone-deaf to the outside world to think that their fashion choices are remotely viable. But they make for a cheap laugh or two, I suppose.

If viewers wouldn't want to spend time with people like this in their real lives, why would they want to watch them on TV? The condescension here is palpable - maybe only Tina Fey's interpretation of Sarah Palin could relate to this stuff.

Even the camera work is off - there's occasional jittery, hand-held business that makes the show look like a documentary, even though it clearly isn't. Despite some genuinely clever one-liners, viewers will likely be too turned off to appreciate them.

*

In these reviews of my reviews, I haven't discussed whether or not I've been empirically correct in my assessments, but historically, I've tended to be in the wheelhouse of critical thought. Today, based on the handful of reviews I've read, the only thing I could be called to the carpet on is that people have only kind of liked "Life on Mars" a little more than I did even if they doubted its longterm viability. But as much as I didn't like "Kath & Kim," calling it nigh unwatchable, it seems everyone else hated it a lot more.

Truth be told, there's not much you can do with a disaster - you can either eviscerate it slowly and painfully, or just dismiss it outright. I tried to give it some benefit of the doubt, but apparently that wasn't necessary. So this review doesn't read as entertainingly as ones where the critics dig right in and tear out its guts.

I wasn't a fan of the Australian version, either, finding it similarly loud and over-the-top, though I attributed it to some cultural disconnect. But maybe I was just right. Maybe it circles the drain, no matter what side of the Equator it's on.

- "Kath & Kim:" 8:30 tonight; NBC Channel 4.

A show that garnered 16 million viewers at its peak less than two years ago got 8 million and change last night. "Heroes" may be beyond rescuing, but here are a few ideas for turning the show around. They may have implemented some of these; I wouldn't know, since like everyone else I've tuned out, too.

Quit being so damn stupid. The season premiere this year was a disaster. The scene in which Hiro (Masi Oka) watched a video from his late father which had but one piece of advice - don't open the safe in my office - and then he did so anyway, only to find another video in which his late father scolds him, "I asked you not to open this safe," was like a moldering Abbot and Costello routine or something. And, of course, it unleashed a potential earth-destroying chain of events. That's our Hiro - as blithely unconcerned about our planet as our President.

(Heckuva job, Hiro-y!)

The writers really need to hunker down and avoid such silly contrivances as this. If someone in the writers room rolls their eyes at a suggestion, then don't use it.

Why can't these people be a little more pro-active? For "Heroes," they don't seem to do a whole lot that's very heroic. Everyone's on the run or moping about or playing defense except Mohinder (Sendhil Ramamurthy), the show's dullest, earnest-as-a-Hardy-Boy character, who, in another dumb move, now has powers. (If anyone can have super-powers, what's the point?)

These guys need to press the attack on, well, whoever (would it kill them to centralize the villainy?). And they can opt to do that when the show takes the next piece of advice.

Kill off a whole bunch of characters. During the first season, creator Tim Kring said he was going to kill off main characters at a wicked clip, but admitted that he had grown fond of them and his cast. As a result, no one who's killed stays away from the show for very long. For God's sake, they've appeared to kill off Nathan (Adrian Pasdar) twice and he's still around. The cast has gotten so unwieldy that a lot of the actors only get one throwaway scene in episodes, which, aside from unnecessarily mucking up the too-sprawling narrative, isn't particularly cost-effective.

(Start with this bunch.)

Eliminating a few of them with extreme prejudice (and not just bit players) will A) give the others a reason to quit whining and start taking the fight to their enemies, B) streamline the narrative back to where it might make sense to the casual viewers, C) reinvigorate a show that at this point just seems to be trying to keep all its balls in the air rather than land on a propulsive story, D) call attention back to the series, E) help NBC in its eternal cost-cutting measures, F) maybe loll viewers out of the slack-jawed somnolence with which they're watching these days and G) possibly put an end to that pretentious drivel that passes for narration at the beginning and end of episodes.

Lighten up, already. "Heroes" was initially a hit because audiences responded to Hiro's pure joy at discovering his powers. Now, he's as sad-sack as the rest of this sorry crew, and that's obviously proven to be a drag on the show. Once the characters man up and start using their powers in a forceful fashion, perhaps they can revel in their abilities rather than remain stranded on the angst-y "why me" default.

Like I said, it may be too late for the show. But these tactics might get one person to start watching it again, and given how much it's dropped in the ratings, one viewer could be pretty important.

This time last month, Tina Fey had a little TV show that ratings analysts have predicted would never be a breakout hit. Since then, she's added three more Emmys to her mantle, will soon become a published author and become exponentially more beloved, thanks to her keen ability to mock Vice Presidential nominee and End Times enthusiast Sarah Palin.

About 10 million folks tuned in to see Fey's latest evisceration of Palin - that's more than 95% of NBC's prime time programming gets, and up 42% from a year ago. Palin's certainly paying attention: At a rally today, she explained that doggone interview with Katie Couric was her way of "just trying to keep Tina Fey in business," and it looks like she'll appear on "SNL's" Thursday-night installment this week, perhaps playing Tina Fey.

Meanwhile, Fey's cleaning up in the publishing world, too - she'll earn somewhere in the neighborhood of $6 million to write a book of "humorous essays." (Alas, by the time the book comes out, we'll either have forgotten Palin or her Presidency will have reduced the nation to rubble.) And here we were, worried that Fey was over-extending herself by honing that Palin impersonation while also writing, producing and starring in "30 Rock."

(By the way, here's a handy online library of the clips Fey no doubt refers to when playing Palin.)

Another breathtaking example of Hollywood originality and risk-taking: They're working on a "Partridge Family" remake. For NBC; network co-chairman Ben Silverman's old company Reveille is producing it.

Ironically, the motto for NBC parent company GE is "Imagination at Work."

Jeff Rake, the guy who came up with the idea to crib the old idea, explains his bold new vision for the show: "In the original, the kids actually recruited their mom to front the band, which I can't see happening in any family on this planet. The new version will reflect what seems to me to be the more realistic family band scenario these days: a struggling, sort of well-meaning mom pimping her kids in order to create a wholesome-slash-sexy cash cow."

So, wait, I'm confused - is this a remake of "The Partridge Family" or a sitcom version of "Living Lohan?"

That whimper you just heard was Television's last remaining vestige of self-respect.

Wow, was Wednesday night a bloodbath. MediaWeek ratings maven Marc Berman declared six shows "Losers" and two more "Disappointing." Should be a fun recap.

Looks like ABC's just going to have to be all "Dancing with the Stars," all the time. Its relaunch of its evening of sophomore shows pretty much tanked. "Pushing Daisies" lost half of its original audience year to year (6.3m viewers last night), "Private Practice" lost close to half its debut crowd (8.05m) and the only reason "Dirty Sexy Money" didn't lose half its viewership is because its was never very large to begin with. Still, "DSM's" 7.14 million viewers were on a par with what the show was doing before it took a premature writers-strike-induced vacation. The other two shows lost a couple million or so apiece from their final audience size last season.

So if ABC had brought these shows back after the strike ended, they might've discovered their viability or lack thereof then, and spared themselves the grief of going through a costly and futile relaunch. Of course, since they didn't have any other shows in development, Wednesday would've just become Test Pattern Theatre Night, but the cost-to-viewership ratio might've been a little better.

Berman, ever the diplomat, deems "Private Practice" merely "disappointing," even though, as the anchor of the night, it's sunk the whole ship. But it did do better than "Knight Rider" (7.56m), "The New Adventures of Old Christine" (6.86m), "Gary Unmarried" (6.97m), "Lipstick Jungle" (5.3m) and "'Til Death" (4.66m - oh, yeah, by the way, Fox cancelled "Do Not Disturb" last week, but it was hardly worth mentioning since no one would've noticed anyway). Here's what qualifies as upside - "Knight Rider" didn't drop off from last week, and "Gary Unmarried" improved a smidgen from its lead-in. These factors will inspire network executives to exercise something in very short supply: patience.

So, what did well? "Bones" actually won its hour, which might've been a first for it in terms of competing against all-new shows (9.8m). "Criminal Minds" won its hour, but that's no big news flash (14.51m), as did "CSI: NY" (14.67m). And "America's Got Talent" got 12.55 million viewers, but that's the end of bright spots for NBC, as that show has finally come to its conclusion.

And The CW was The CW. As usual.

Here's an interesting business model: Find a show with crummy ratings and then become a co-producer on it, and show it on your satellite network that only has 17.1 million subscribers nationwide.

I'm not sure how that helps anyone, really, except the cast and crew of a show that'd probably be cancelled otherwise. But it explains why the critically acclaimed "Friday Night Lights" will be premiering on DirecTV's 101 Network tonight.

DirecTV's Eric Shanks explains how this works for them: "It was the perfect show to really start to execute a content strategy based around high quality, premium entertainment. DirecTV believes in delivering a unique content experience to its customers with the goal of retaining our existing customers and trying to attract new customers. So 'Friday Night Lights' was the absolute perfect fit: It's the most upscale drama on television and it's adored by a loyal group of very passionate fans. The goal for us isn't necessarily to be a huge ratings hit, because we've chosen not to sell commercials. Instead, we're going to look to find those passionate niches. ...

"Halfway through the season, we'll go back and do research with the customers who joined during that period to find out if 'Friday Night Lights' had an effect. This is the start of this premium content strategy for us - there's no particular number that we have in mind, we just need to find out if this strategy is going to start to resonate with people."

After each episode, for the show's most obsessive fans, they'll present "Live from Dillon," featuring interviews with cast members (successful series don't get their own talk shows!). The season will run 13 episodes and focus more on football again rather than murder like it did last season. It'll show up on NBC next year, to, likely, worse ratings that it had last season. But I guess we'll see just how passionate those fans are. Remember how all those "Jericho" fans besieged CBS with peanuts and then when the show came back almost no one watched?

DirecTV sent me a "Friday Night Lights" screener, but it was for next week's episode, not tonight's. Go figure. Maybe we'll discuss it next week.

- "Friday Night Lights:" 9 p.m., 101 Network (DirecTV subscribers only).

On yesterday's ratings roundup, Bill commented:

"(R)atings are flawed, though, considering the bottom line and the Internet.

"I work nights and have no DVR (and finding blank VHS tapes is not as easy or cost-effective as it used to be). So, much of my viewing is on the Internet. I watched 'Heroes' on Tuesday morning on Hulu.com, and had previously watched the 'Chuck' and 'Life' premieres last week on Hulu, and I bet a lot of others had as well.

"Why should we continue to use a now antiquated system to judge a show's success?"

Excellent question, and it could be expanded to: Why did we ever use a system that polls such a small percentage and the same basic people on a weekly basis rather than trying to get a more diverse sampling?

And the answer, as insufficient as it is, is: Because it's still pretty much the only game in town. TiVo users provide more data, adding what shows were watched up to a week after they aired, but that isn't reported as much because this is a culture that values instant gratification and, after we hear about the overnights, we move on to the next set of factoids. The networks will report on what got watched online if it's really impressive news (for example, NBC touted the fact that its first Tina-Fey-as-Sarah-Palin sketch was NBC.com's most-watched online video), but they don't offer much else - willingly, at least.

Also, the ratings are for the benefit, primarily, of the advertisers, who want to know whether they're getting their money's worth for ponying up big bucks to get their commercials in certain shows. They just happen to be of interest to (some of) the rest of us because we want to know which shows we shouldn't be getting too used to. Hulu runs spots, too, but they're not always the ones that ran in the show's initial airing.

The networks have spent a lot of time talking about their online business guiding viewers back to the TV, but based on the low ratings of, say, "Chuck" and "Life," that doesn't quite seem to be the case yet. If in fact it ever will be. If someone has numbers to prove otherwise, I'll be happy to see them.

And now, onto our Tuesday ratings extravaganza:

CBS won the viewership battle but Fox won the demographic war. "NCIS" kicked everyone's butt with 17.24 million viewers, but "House," with 12.66 million viewers, actually had far more in the 18-49 age range advertisers spend their money on.

Same deal with "The Mentalist" and "Fringe:" "Mentalist" had five million more viewers (15.27m to 10.04m) but "Fringe" had more aged 18 to 49. (In the same hour, the "Dancing with the Stars" results show had 15.14m viewers, but was No. 3 in the demo).

So we'll say it again: "The Mentalist," which held on to its sizable lead-in as well as the audience it attracted with its debut last week, is the season's first new hit.

"Without a Trace" and "Law & Order: SVU" similarly swapped bragging rights. More people watched "WaT" (12.65m to 10.02m), but more younger viewers tuned into "SVU."

The rest of the night was Shrugsville: "Biggest Loser," 6.7m, "Opportunity Knocks," DOA with 5.9m, 3 or so million for The CW, and an ABC special on weight loss had a very slender 5.3m viewers.

Pretty much a bloodbath in the ratings last night, as MediaWeek ratings guru Marc Berman calls no fewer than six shows "losers."

It was all about "Dancing with the Stars," which bulldozed the competition with 19.28m viewers and a hefty No. 1 in the 18-49 demo. (I'm going to quit explaining that from here on out.) But at 10 p.m., "Boston Legal" chased away half that audience - there's your first loser.

("Boy is there egg on our faces! Ha, ha - get it? Because we tanked in the ratings and we're dressed like birds? Ha, ha, ha - oh, never mind.")

CBS did OK, with "Big Bang Theory" (8.7m), "How I Met Your Mother" (8.8m), "2.5 Men" (13.76m) and "CSI: Miami" (14.07m). "Worst Week" won't have many more of them in the future, as it squandered nearly 4.5 million viewers from it's "2.5 Men" lead-in and had lower numbers in the 18-49 demo than "Big Bang" and "Met Your Mother," even though it had more viewers. There's your second loser.

NBC glumly provides us with losers three and four: Its relaunches of "Chuck" (6.2m) and "Life" (6.9m) were (insert grisly launching-pad metaphor here). (Previously, NBC had announced it was picking up "Chuck" for the entire season. Wonder if they'll remain good on that promise.) And "Heroes" has lost its super powers, managing only 9.3m viewers, a precipitous drop from last season, though Mr. Berman thoughtfully kept if off the loser list.

Fox rounds out our parade of failure, with "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles" (5.3m) and "Prison Break" (5.2m). Mr. Berman cuts The CW some slack, apparently because they kvetch when he labels their shows losers, but "Gossip Girl" and "One Tree Hill" had more than 3m viewers apiece, which is good by their standards.

Not a bad Sunday ratings-wise; no executive is pulling his hair out today.

Football on NBC led the way with 16 million viewers. ABC took second with "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" averaging 9.5 million over two hours (the only mildly worrying aspect of the night - that's down more than 2 million from last season), "Desperate Housewives" (18.4m) and "Brothers & Sisters" (12.35m).

CBS had "60 Minutes" (12.1m), "The Amazing Race" (10.3m), "Cold Case" (11.2m) and "The Unit" (9.75m). Fox's "Simpsons" (9.3m), "King of the Hill" (7m), "Family Guy" (9.2m) and "American Dad" (6.86m) scored well in the 18-49 demo, so their lower numbers are forgiven by advertisers who don't even want to think about people over the age of 50 seeing their commercials and buying their products.

And an estimated 57 million people who care about the fate of the country watched the McCain/Obama debate Friday night.

Any other season, "Life" would not be on anyone's schedule - it had pretty low ratings last year, though it did actually improve, a smidgen, as the season wore on. As it is, I wouldn't get my hopes up too much for it, since after a couple of Monday airings, NBC's consigning it to the Siberia known as Friday night.

What kept the show hanging in there is Damian Lewis' wry, understated performances as Charlie Crews as a fruit-munching L.A. detective who returns to the job after being wrongly imprisoned. Lewis plays Charlie as a guy who enjoys being smarter than anyone else in the room, but without any hauteur. They've added a new reason to tune in - Donal Logue's amusing turn as Charlie's new boss, Captain Tidwell, who's a bit of a jerk and could use a filter of some sort between his brain and his mouth.

Tonight's episode begins as many cop shows do - with a scantily clad dead woman. She's found in a trunk; beneath her body, the number 1 has been stenciled into the base. Trunks 2 and 3 turn up quickly, with more corpses; the victims all suffocated inside the trunks (they didn't seem to try to kick their way out). A luggage shop owner tells Charlie he sold 10 trunks to a mysterious guy. How many trunks can they keep from being filled?

Next Monday's episode offers an inventive murder: A scientist at a lab engaging in animal testing is found frozen after inhaling from a tank of liquid nitrogen - seems someone switched out his oxygen tank. Charlie picks at him, and the guy shatters into pieces. Suspects include members of an animal-rights group.

The mysteries are serviceable (tonight's is predictable), but in both episodes, out of sort of nowhere characters kind of snap in that melodramatic way where they confess to the crime and then rail against society in general. "Life" is fair; sometimes, "Life" can be good. But as the crooks will tell you - loudly, histrionically - "Life" isn't great.

- "Life:" 10 p.m. tonight and Oct. 6; also, 10 p.m. Fridays, NBC (Channel 4).