The Extratextuals

As the dust from the Upfronts settles, and looking at what got canceled this year, I’m inclined first to divide the shows into four categories – those that I liked, those that I don’t particularly care one way or the other about, those that I’m actively glad to see go, and those that I simply didn’t know existed or never watched so I can’t pass judgment. Here’s the lists, then some comments:

Those I Liked
Subdivided into:

• Those whose time had probably come: ER
• Those whose time had not come, and that I’m pissed to see go: Boston Legal, My Name is Earl, Pushing Daisies
• Those that I watched occasionally, enjoyed when I did, but am not choked to see go: Reaper, Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles, Without a Trace

Those I’m Indifferent About
Dirty Sexy Money, Eli Stone, Everybody Hates Chris, The Game, Harper’s Island, Hole in the Wall, Life, Life on Mars, My Own Worst Enemy, The Unit, The Unusuals

Those I’m Happy to See Leave My Television

• According to Jim (about as funny as hardwood)
• Deal or No Deal (women on show with cases and contestants who don’t understand math)
• Do Not Disturb (some promise, but more stereotypes and stupidity than promise, alas)
• The Ex List (I was prepared to dislike it, but it was ultimately more incompetent than annoying)
• Howie Do It (So. Very. Very. Painfully. Unfunny)
• Kath and Kim (if I had to torture someone, I’d make them watch this, Clockwork Orange style. Even Cheney would agree that constitutes bona fide torture)
• Knight Rider (who knew I’d miss David Hasselhoff? It was that bad)
• Lipstick Jungle (I never really liked Sex and the City, so why would I like its poor rip-off?)
• Prison Break (come on, how many prisons does a guy break out of in one lifetime?!)
• Samantha Who? (vile)

Those I Never Really Knew
4Real, 13: Fear is Real, America’s Toughest Jobs, The Chopping Block, Crusoe, Cupid, Easy Money, The Eleventh Hour, Game Show in My Head, Homeland Security USA, In Harm’s Way, In the Motherhood, Kings, Momma’s Boys, Opportunity Knocks, The Osbournes: Reloaded, Privileged, Secret Millionaire, Sit Down Shut Up, Superstars of Dance, Valentine

Dividing them up into lists like this makes me realize how much on television I simply don’t watch. And I watch quite a lot of television. As a television researcher and instructor, I try to make it my business to watch a lot of stuff, even if I’m not liking it, just so that I have a sense of what’s out there. So I’d guess that I watch a more diverse list of shows than do many viewers. Yet not only were there a lot of cancellations of shows that I didn’t watch, but some of them I’ve never even heard of. It’s worth bearing in mind when the news covers the inevitable “Save ____” campaigns that many of us simply don’t know about much of what’s on television, and thus don’t care about lots of cancellations.

I think here of a neat essay by Ien Ang called “In the Realm of Uncertainty” (included in Living Room Wars) in which she argues that much communication fails, and is characterized by a considerable amount of chaos. Amidst excited discussions of social networking sites and Web 2.0 allowing us to share everything with people, and even amidst some critics’ reminders that such sites can be hijacked by corporate PR efforts, we’re often invited to think of today’s media consumer as well-informed, and of the system as working well. But is it really? Yes, large amounts of information might be at our finger tips if we went looking for it, but our media consumption is still characterized by a lot of happenstance and chaos. Many shows not only pass us by, but pass us by unnoticed.

Thinking about my own beloved texts gives clear evidence of how elusive much media is. I discovered The Wire prior to Season 4’s broadcast, and I hadn’t even heard of it until Season 3 had begun. I came late to The West Wing. And to Buffy. Even The Simpsons took me a few seasons to discover. And those are all on major channels. Add to the mix shows on lesser-known cable channels, and there are literally hundreds of shows at any given time that might be great, but that I’m not hearing about. It’s not just me, either, of course – I’m used to hearing fellow television fans give voice to considerable anxiety, about not having time to watch everything they want to watch, and about possibly missing out on a great, yet unknown show.

It’s par for course to complain about the over-hyping of things (witness the recent omnipresence of Will Ferrell, prior to the release of Land of the Lost), but let’s not make the mistake of assuming that pervasive hype is necessarily successful in getting the word about shows out. How could either the television industry or fans better circulate information about shows? Of course, I don’t want to make the mistake of assuming that all canceled, unknown shows were worth saving, but nor should we assume that they were all worth canceling. This year is no different from others, with many cancellations, so how could the industry, writers, critics, and/or fans try to improve our information center and improve how we hear about shows, rather than simply hope that next year the viewing public will all discover all the shows we love, and nothing we dislike will ever be canceled again?

upfronts cancellations, upfronts

A neat video that anyone interested in advertising and television should enjoy:

ads, viral videos ads, upfronts

[Note from Jonathan: given my recent posts on the Upfronts, I thought I should go to an expert on the topic, Amanda Lotz, Associate Prof. of Communication Studies at University of Michigan, to ask for some analysis. Amanda has attended the Upfronts in the past, and her research on the topic can be found here and here. Welcome, Amanda]

The most intriguing aspect of this year’s upfronts was not whether Chuck would find a place on the NBC schedule nor does it have anything to do with the machinations that led to Medium’s transplantation from NBC to CBS in the fall. In fact, despite the galas, celebrations, and pounds of cocktail shrimp, the crucial question of this year’s upfront remains to be answered. Although perennially a possibility, this year more than others seems ripe for a reallocation of spending from broadcast to cable for primetime viewers.

There is certainly no good reason why this should particularly happen this year instead of in years past. For more than two decades, advertisers have paid steadily more for less in an effort to reach the diminishing “mass” audience. Despite thinning audiences, broadcasters maintained cachet as the most mass alternative in a fragmenting world. What has changed recently, however, is that cable increasingly offers a viable alternative as broadcast audiences for midrange shows continue to fall and ratings for original cable dramas climb. Perhaps some of the lack of excitement regarding the broadcast upfront presentations this year results from the fact that the programming being announced just isn’t that exciting, and even the game of handicapping apparently boneheaded moves has lost some luster as fewer and fewer care much about the programs on offer. Don’t get me wrong, there is a lot of good programming on television—perhaps more so than at any other time. Indeed, a lot of good programs won’t make it back next season—as it isn’t enough just to be good anymore. There is also a lot of great programming on the air. The trouble for broadcasters is that a lot of the good and great original programming can’t be found on their channels.

Increasingly, it is not just the television literati that has found favorite shows airing on cable. Sure, the New York Times-set will carry on endlessly about Mad Men and FX still offers sophisticated drama that now largely surpass the pay-cabler it once emulated, but USA and TNT have become destinations for reliably good series. Most offer a blend of convention (an episodic mystery or case) and an eccentric character or characters and far snappier writing than the average broadcast procedural. Many are also much less dark than the murderous fare that continues to succeed with the remaining “mass” audience, particularly for CBS. Turner will have seven original dramas on the air this summer (that’s one more than NBC’s fall schedule) and TNT’s The Closer averaged 5.8 million viewers this spring, while USA routinely beats The CW and even NBC in key demos — just to offer some sense of the shifting program terrain.

The difference, I’d argue, between these cable series and those offered by broadcasters is an emphasis on intriguing characters that help make what might otherwise be tried and trite program conventions tiresome. The cable shows have largely avoided the most conventional franchise formulas and somehow nuanced the stability such shows offer (the solving of crimes, pulling of capers). Indeed, the quirkiness of their characters may be particular to cable; precisely what makes the cable characters interesting is what might make them unappealing to broadcast’s still slightly more mass audience.

Which brings me back to the remaining excitement of this year’s upfront—will advertisers refuse to buy to broadcast the old way—based on minimal increase or decrease in last year’s rate and force a reevaluation of advertising pricing that makes more sense in the current television competitive environment. Certainly, the truly revolutionary shift actually warranted remains difficult to imagine even in this still change-embracing milieu. But some sort of meaningful shot over the bow is possible that suggests the beginning of a valuation of advertising time between cable and broadcast prime time that makes some sense.

new shows, upfronts cable, upfronts

Finishing our tour through this Fall’s TV schedule, let’s look at the CW.

Remember when The WB network began and it had a fair amount of African American programming, but then it went for wealthy young white women? Then UPN also programmed a lot of African American content. Then the two merged, and African American shows were ghettoized into one night so that the wealthy young white women could hold court for the other nights. Well, with the cancellation of The Game and Everybody Hates Chris, the CW can now boldly announce that CW stands for Completely White. (Okay, there’s Tyra and there’s the kid on 90210, but not much else.)

Gone, too, are 13: Fear is Real, 4Real, Easy Money, In Harm’s Way, Privileged, Reaper, and Valentine.

What’s new? After the fold …
Read more…

ads, new shows, previews, upfronts CW, upfronts

CBS’s turn to unveil their schedule came yesterday. But first, fellow Extratextual Ivan Askwith just posted some neat thoughts about serial television, and I’d hate for them to be swallowed amidst my upfront posts, so please scroll down to read those too.

As for CBS, there’s no eleventh hour reprieve for The Eleventh Hour, Without a Trace vanished, The Ex List is now on the ex-show list, Worst Week certainly had its worst week, The Unit got a bullet between the eyes, Harper’s Island experienced a horrific end too, and Game Show in My Head will remain in the head.

However, Patricia Arquette went from speaking to the dead to reincarnating the dead, as her Medium, just a day after getting tossed by NBC, is now on CBS. It will be on a new Women Who Talk to Dead People Friday, along with Ghost Whisperer.

Below the fold are CBS’ new shows, and that whole “rescued from death” theme is prevalent:

Read more…

ads, new shows, previews, upfronts CBS, Medium, NCIS, upfronts

With all of the standard noise and fanfare this week around the network upfront announcements, I almost didn’t notice this passing comment from Steve McPherson, President of the ABC Entertainment Group, about the forthcoming “re-imagination” of V:

“[It has a] normal order right now, 13 episodes. We really, from the beginning, want to craft a whole series, and we’d like to be able to announce what that is at the time that it airs. At this point we believe it’s going to be in four parts, and those will be anything from 13 to 22 episodes in each part. But it will have a beginning, middle and end,” he added.”

While the creative and business benefits of this approach will make intuitive sense to audiences of telenovelas (which are structured as long-form but limited-duration narratives) and non-American networks such as the BBC (where even mainstream hits such as “The Office” and “Life on Mars” end after only 1-2 seasons), it strikes me as proof of an important evolution among American television networks, where high-performing shows are extended indefinitely as “sure bets.”

The problem, of course, is that indefinite renewal works far better for some types of narrative (e.g, sitcoms, procedurals, episodic dramas) than others (i.e. long-form, evolving and complex narratives). I’ve addressed this topic in more depth in the chapter that I contributed to Reading Lost
, which considered some of the motives that compelled ABC to approve a firm end-date for Lost several years in advance.

In the closing paragraph of that chapter, I proposed that ABC’s unconventional (and intelligent) decision to let Lost’s showrunners work toward an established ending could have significant implications for the future of American network television:

After LOST’s first season, critics and writers suggested that the show’s most important contribution was that it cleared the path for a new wave of television programmes with rich details and complex, rewarding narratives. If Fox is right, and LOST’s final three seasons demonstrate the importance of an established end date in developing a coherent and compelling serial narrative, the show may accomplish something even more important. It may provide the precedent for a new era of television narratives that have the freedom to end.

I believed it when I wrote it, and I believe it even more now. At the same event, McPherson — who authorized Lost’s finite run — conceded that:

I think that was obviously a tough decision a few years ago to give it an ending, but I think it really paid off. This season was stronger than it’s ever been because there wasn’t an infinite middle to the show. So I think, giving them an end date, you’re going to see probably some of the strongest writing you’ve ever seen on the show, because they’ve been able to really retrofit from exactly where they want to end up.

To me, it looks like V is being granted the golden opportunity that Lost never got: the chance to plan a beginning, middle and end from the beginning. Here’s hoping V makes good use of it.

new shows ABC, Lost, serial television, upfronts

I’ve already discussed NBC’s new shows, since they already announced them. But the big news of the day, for me, is that Chuck was renewed. And in talks with journalists, Ben Silverman drew the line directly back to the fans’ and Subway’s campaign to keep the show around (see my post on the campaign here).

Law and Order was the other lucky survivor of the day, though Medium, Life, and My Name is Earl weren’t so lucky. Apparently, CBS might pick up Medium, and My Name is Earl’s Greg Garcia is also hoping to shop his show around. Garcia wasn’t a happy man, firing back at NBC that “It’s hard to be too upset about being thrown off the Titanic.” Ouch. I hope the show finds a new home, since I really like it (what’s not to like about Randy and/or Crab Man?), and it seems like it might be a good fit with FOX.

As for the schedule, more after the fold:

Read more…

ads, new shows, previews, upfronts Chuck, Jay Leno, My Name is Earl, NBC, upfronts

I found clips of some of the new shows, and I’m embedding them after the fold

Read more…

ads, new shows, previews, upfronts FOX, upfronts

FOX went first, and James Poniewozik says it was an odd presentation, in that it wasn’t so much about the brilliance of FOX, but of TV. As he writes:

it spent most of its time, before screening clips of its new shows, defending the medium of television itself. Despite what pundits in the media are telling you, they told advertisers, the vast majority of TV watchers still watch on a television set, and not online. And they do so watch the ads! […]

But when you’re working this hard to persuade a room of advertisers of the basic efficacy of your medium—you are nervous about something. And mind you, this is the network that has American Idol. What the hell is ABC going to say tomorrow?

Anyways, down to business, after the fold:
Read more…

ads, new shows, previews, upfronts FOX, upfronts

The upfront presentations are this week. For those unaware of this ritual, it’s a week during which the networks trump out their Fall schedules to advertisers, often involving lavish parties and hoopla, as a prelude to a massive ad spot buying binge that follows.

The schedule: FOX kicks it off on Monday, NBC and ABC do Tuesday, and CBS and The CW are on Wednesday.

I’ve already discussed NBC’s new shows, since they had an early “infront,” though a few choices remain for the Peacock, including whether to keep Chuck (though reports are now suggesting that my favorite spy, is indeed back, albeit for an abbreviated 13 episode season) and My Name is Earl. But I’ll try to comment on each day’s activities as and when I can.

In the meantime, I’d point readers towards Alan Sepinwall of the New Jersey Star Ledger. Discussing the leaked news that Scrubs, Chuck, and Dollhouse, amongst other existing shows on the bubble, are returning, he offers an interesting thought:

The idea that a new show automatically has a better shot to draw viewers than a marginal returning series may not be the case anymore, and in this scary environment, a steady number is a steady number.

For more signs of what the networks think is going to make life better for them, stay tuned this week.

ads, new shows, previews upfronts