tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23 2009-03-30T20:12:42Z TelevisionWeek is teaming up with TV industry veteran Marianne Paskowski. The blog will give Marianne a forum to convey her deep knowledge of the industry and pass along some of the juicy morsels she's hearing on the grapevine. Marianne has covered the TV industry from the inside out and top to bottom, and TVWeek's readers are bound to benefit from her sharp eyes, ears and wit. TVWeek.com invites readers to jump online, chime in and pick Marianne's brain on the latest industry news. Movable Type 3.33 tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.51731 2009-03-30T19:38:42Z 2009-03-30T20:12:42Z

God, I felt like I got hit with a bolt of lightning when I read in many published reports today that Dylan Ratigan, who was the host of CNBC’s highly acclaimed “Fast Money,” reportedly left the network last Friday. His contract expires tomorrow, but from all accounts he has his cap set on a bigger spot, namely a role at ABC News. Ratigan, who worked for CNBC for five years, also co-hosted “Closing Bell” with Maria Bartiromo, a veteran at the financial news network. With the financial crisis growing, viewers need the passion and common sense that Ratigan delivers as he tries to make sense of this global economic mess for the layman. Oddly enough, so far, CNBC has made absolutely no mention of his departure, even though he didn’t show up for duty Friday, and had been out earlier the week before with the flu. So what’s the next platform for Ratigan? Some TV critics see him having his own late evening or early morning broadcast network show. But could this just be a contract negotiation ploy on the part of CNBC? Whatever, I miss the P.T. Barnum of TV financial news. May he return somewhere and soon.

Vlada Gelman http://www.tvweek.com God, I felt like I got hit with a bolt of lightning when I read in many published reports today that Dylan Ratigan, who was the host of CNBC’s highly acclaimed “Fast Money,” reportedly left the network last Friday. His... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.50792 2009-03-06T05:26:10Z 2009-03-06T19:46:38Z

Here’s a headline that should make you think hard about how all the body parts are not working in the Beltway. The Associated Press reported Thursday night that Dr. Sanjay Gupta, well known as the host of CNN’s “House Call” and President Barack Obama’s first pick for the post of surgeon general took himself out of the selection process. What a ridiculous choice that was, President Obama, I have to say. Gupta cited personal reasons, like wanting to spend more time with his family. Personally, I think the 39-year-old neurosurgeon, who also practices surgery at Atlanta’s Grady Memorial Hospital, saw the political clouds of opposition forming. He apparently didn’t have skeletons in the closet like tax issues, but was he really appropriate, given his age, and given that he is a TV celebrity with an active practice? Was he ready to become the talking head in Obama’s important and radical healthcare reform plan? I doubt it. The AP said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., circulated a letter saying that Gupta was inexperienced and urging Obama not to name him. I’m glad Conyers did that. And personally I wish Obama would just slow down. Fix the economy, create jobs, untangle the mortgage/bank problems and then give healthcare more time to rationalize into a real policy. Obama coulda, shoulda, but apparently hasn’t learned much yet from Hillary Clinton about her first botched efforts to reform health care.

Lisa Horowitz tvweek.com Here’s a headline that should make you think hard about how all the body parts are not working in the Beltway. The Associated Press reported Thursday night that Dr. Sanjay Gupta, well known as the host of CNN’s “House Call”... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.50508 2009-02-27T16:10:34Z 2009-02-27T19:17:51Z

Cablevision Systems Corp. COO Tom Rutledge told analysts yesterday that the company took a sizable hit last quarter, mostly because of its acquisition of Long Island, N.Y.-based Newsday. To stem the blood flow from Newsday, Rutledge told analysts that it would begin charging the newspaper’s subscribers for access to its online edition. And that’s a big move down a slippery slope, considering that most of the country’s newspapers, with the exception of the Wall Street Journal, offer readers their online content for free. So does Cablevision, a multiple system cable operator, know something about the newspaper industry that it just became immersed in last year that old-time, traditional publishers don’t know? You have to wonder, given that EW Scripps, publisher of the 150-year-old Rocky Mountain News, is printing its last edition of the battered newspaper today, having failed to find a buyer. I doubt Cablevision will succeed with its move to charge for Newsday’s online content, given that readers in Long Island have many other newspaper options. Anyone think Cablevision will succeed with this rather stunning endeavor?

Tom Gilbert tvweek.com Cablevision Systems Corp. COO Tom Rutledge told analysts yesterday that the company took a sizable hit last quarter, mostly because of its acquisition of Long Island, N.Y.-based Newsday. To stem the blood flow from Newsday, Rutledge told analysts that it... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.50373 2009-02-25T17:19:53Z 2009-02-25T23:23:17Z

President Barack Obama took to the nation’s airwaves last night, addressing a joint session of the House and Senate. The morning after, critics are praising his speech, noting how telegenic he is, but in the end concluding that the president didn’t provide any real detail on how he was going to kick-start the economy. Instead, he provided a wide panorama with few in-depth plans. Just yesterday the market soared when Fed head Ben Bernanke told a finance oversight committee that the administration has no intention of nationalizing the banks. The market closed up 236 points because investors heard what they wanted to hear,. Today, after Obama’a Monday evening speech, the market is currently in the red, largely because Obama didn’t say yay or nay about nationalizing the banks. And how could he, with the results not yet known as the nation’s banks begin to undergo the so-called new stress tests? Obama was smart not to make promises he could not keep, even though he knew Wall Street wouldn’t like not getting clarity. On a scale of 1 through 5, I’d rate Obamavision Episode Two a 4. Although his line “The nation that created the auto industry cannot walk away from it” was memorable, in was factually wrong. Actually kudos there go to Germany’s Mercedes-Benz. Who knew? Thank you, CNN.

Lisa Horowitz tvweek.com President Barack Obama took to the nation’s airwaves last night, addressing a joint session of the House and Senate. The morning after, critics are praising his speech, noting how telegenic he is, but in the end concluding that the president... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.50192 2009-02-20T18:26:24Z 2009-02-20T19:36:12Z

As if primetime television wasn’t already bad enough, there are gobs of recession-related pilots awaiting the green light for this fall, according to The Hollywood Reporter. Well-paid TV executives, I guess, are trying to demonstrate their sensitivity to the victims of the recession and are shying away from “office-based shows.” They figure viewers don’t want to be reminded about their workplace, or lack of one, says the Reporter. One dreadful-sounding pilot CBS is looking at is “Waiting to Die,” a sitcom about two guys who are happy with their lives even though they have nothing going for them. I’ll bet the house against the sitcom keeping that moniker if it gets out of the starting gate. Another sitcom in development for Fox is “Two-Dollar Beer,” about a blue-collar couple struggling in Detroit who feel their lives have become irrelevant. Gee, why not just sit down with a dark tome from Kafka or Sartre about existentialism? Sorry, neither show sounds funny or delivers on the promise of sitcom: pure escapism. I predict failure if either of these downers gets off the drawing board.

Vlada Gelman http://www.tvweek.com As if primetime television wasn’t already bad enough, there are gobs of recession-related pilots awaiting the green light for this fall, according to The Hollywood Reporter. Well-paid TV executives, I guess, are trying to demonstrate their sensitivity to the victims... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.49981 2009-02-17T19:46:45Z 2009-02-17T19:48:46Z

L’Oreal, one of the Academy Awards’ biggest sponsors last year with its catchy slogan “Because You’re Worth It,” apparently has had a change of heart and will not sponsor the Oscars this Sunday on ABC. Last year the cosmetics giant bought eight spots in the Academy Awards. This year it took a pass altogether, even though ABC reportedly has lowered the cost of a 30-second spot during the awards show from $1.8 million to roughly $1.4 million. Clearly the dismal economy entered into L’Oreal’s decision. But maybe the advertiser was fearful of consumer backlash, according to today’s New York Post. If that’s the case, L’Oreal with its aspirational brands of face and hair care products sold primarily in drug stores, erred in judgment by skipping this opportunity to appeal to cost-conscious viewers. A large part of the fun of watching the Oscars is the voyeuristic aspect, seeing how the stars look and what they are wearing during television’s second-largest broadcast. L’Oreal should have tweaked its message to say something like, “Look Like a Million for Far Less.” That kind of message would resonate with women watching at home who are already pinching pennies, as they flee Saks’ cosmetics counters to buy beauty products at CVS. Clearly L’Oreal is another so-called paradox of saving: By not advertising, it is not encouraging customers to modestly spend their way out of this deep and prolonged recession.

Vlada Gelman http://www.tvweek.com L’Oreal, one of the Academy Awards’ biggest sponsors last year with its catchy slogan “Because You’re Worth It,” apparently has had a change of heart and will not sponsor the Oscars this Sunday on ABC. Last year the cosmetics giant... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.49882 2009-02-12T20:04:26Z 2009-02-12T20:38:32Z

Next week CBS CEO Leslie Moonves will report earnings, and I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see a hefty dividend cut for shareholders. And that’s a good thing, considering the company’s cash flow is dropping due to the continuing downslide in ad sales. Today CBS was trading at $5.60, just shy of the bottom of its 52-week track record ranging from $4.36 to $25.83. That’s nearly a 19% yield, or what the street calls an “accidental high dividend yielder,” because the lower the value of a share of the company’s stock, the higher the yield on the dividend. In press reports in December, Moonves said he had every intention of paying a solid dividend, but that he would do whatever is necessary to keep the business flowing. It’s time, Les. Just yesterday, Sinclair Broadcast Group announced it was suspending its dividend, following many companies outside the media sector that have taken that same step earlier in the year. Now it’s time for Moonves to step up to the plate and do the right thing for his ailing business model. Taking that step, according to today’s Wall Street Journal, would eliminate $752 million in dividend payouts and put the money back to work on the company’s ledger sheet. Agree?

Lisa Horowitz tvweek.com Next week CBS CEO Leslie Moonves will report earnings, and I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see a hefty dividend cut for shareholders. And that’s a good thing, considering the company’s cash flow is dropping due to the continuing... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.49663 2009-02-06T18:44:23Z 2009-02-12T20:36:41Z

According to WashingtonPost.com, broadcast network executives are not happy about President Barack Obama’s plan to hold a televised press conference in primetime on Monday. In fact, they are bracing themselves for the likelihood of three such primetime speeches from him during the February sweeps that will cut into their profits. “We’re all going to take a bath,” said one network executive interviewed for that article. In the piece, entitled “Obama’s Preemptive Strike,” another network executive snidely said, “His economic stimulus package apparently does not extend to the TV networks,” referring to the likely $9 million loss in advertising revenues. And the savvy Obama picked Monday, a night that gets better ratings than, say, Friday or Saturday. What a heap of hubris this is, given that the networks have been the beneficiaries of free government-owned spectrum since the get-go. Throughout his campaign, Obama warned that the economy will worsen before it improves. Given today’s job-loss report, that fear has become a reality. Upon becoming president, Obama said we’re all in this together, asking for sacrifices from everyone. So despite the hand-wringing from broadcast nets about loss of ad dollars, they will comply and air Obama’s speeches. “You don’t want to incur the wrath of the White House,” another executive told the Washington Post. Frankly, I’m happy we have a president who is using the airwaves to tell the nation what’s going on, unlike his predecessor, who ruled in near secrecy.

Lisa Horowitz tvweek.com According to WashingtonPost.com, broadcast network executives are not happy about President Barack Obama’s plan to hold a televised press conference in primetime on Monday. In fact, they are bracing themselves for the likelihood of three such primetime speeches from him... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.49371 2009-01-30T18:42:08Z 2009-01-30T19:03:58Z

CBS said Thursday that it would go on with its annual upfront ad sales presentation at Carnegie Hall in Manhattan in May, as usual. At first blush this sounds insensitive, if not downright obscene, given that every day we read about seemingly unending staff reductions and hiring freezes, as well as pay and bonus freezes, at just about every media company. But these annual dog-and-pony shows put on by the broadcast and cable networks are becoming tamer by the year, as they should given the media business’s continuing downward decline. So I say let the show go on. After all, you have to spend money to make money, and these presentations are very pragmatic. It’s an opportunity for a network to strut its stuff to a large, captive audience in one venue. And CBS, at least, has a strong story to tell. But will the other networks, like the fourth-place NBC, hold upfront bashes as well? And the biggest question is, should they?

Lisa Horowitz tvweek.com CBS said Thursday that it would go on with its annual upfront ad sales presentation at Carnegie Hall in Manhattan in May, as usual. At first blush this sounds insensitive, if not downright obscene, given that every day we read... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.49256 2009-01-28T18:54:18Z 2009-01-28T19:39:16Z

With the delay of the digital transition from Feb. 17 to June 12 looking almost certain, there is one underlying reason to do it: The networks simply won’t risk another ratings drop during their new seasons and would rather wait until reruns air after the May sweeps. The Senate voted unanimously for the delay on Monday and the measure awaits likely approval in the House. From there it hits President Barack Obama’s desk for approval to a delay he already has said he supports. Where do you stand on delaying the DTV switch? Make your voice heard in TVWeek's online poll. Click here to take the survey. The delay likely will strain the already tense relationship between the networks and their TV station affiliates. TV stations by and large want to pull the switch as planned, saying they will lose millions of dollars if they need to carry the digital and analog signals until June. But what’s the big deal? Apparently TV stations who have already received approval from the Federal Communications Commission to switch to digital in February still plan to do just that, regardless of the outcome of the vote. Now that’s going to be interesting, depending on how many TV stations opt to do that, and in the process create real marketplace confusion. That begs the question of whether those TV stations that have FCC approval should be allowed to switch to digital on Feb. 17. You decide.

Vlada Gelman http://www.tvweek.com With the delay of the digital transition from Feb. 17 to June 12 looking almost certain, there is one underlying reason to do it: The networks simply won’t risk another ratings drop during their new seasons and would rather... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.48886 2009-01-19T20:38:46Z 2009-01-19T22:27:50Z

I couldn’t believe my ears while watching CNN on Saturday and its coverage of the pre-inaugural ceremonies at the Lincoln Memorial. The event of the days was a free, star-studded concert for those in town for this momentous time in history, the swearing in of the nation’s first African American president, Barack Obama. But plenty of people at home could not see it if they didn’t have a computer or were not subscribers to pay cable channel HBO. While the concert was going on, CNN reporter Wolf Blitzer repeatedly told viewers at home that CNN would not be covering the concert because its sister network HBO had the exclusive rights. What kind of inclusiveness is that? And there’s more. HBO was not alone in making an exclusive media deal, having paid $2.5 million for the exclusive on the concert, according to published reports. The Walt Disney Co. paid $2 million for two events that will run exclusively on its Disney Channel and the ABC network. Disney gets exclusive coverage of a children’s concert tonight on the Disney Channel. ABC, meanwhile, gets exclusive broadcast rights to air the first of the 10 official balls tomorrow night. To me, this defies Obama’s mantra “Yes we can.” For viewers without cable television, it sure sounds more like “No we can’t.”

Vlada Gelman http://www.tvweek.com I couldn’t believe my ears while watching CNN on Saturday and its coverage of the pre-inaugural ceremonies at the Lincoln Memorial. The event of the days was a free, star-studded concert for those in town for this momentous time... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.48799 2009-01-16T18:14:16Z 2009-01-16T18:15:01Z

I don’t know what’s so magical about June 12, but that’s the new date set by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, incoming chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, for the conversion of analog to digital signals. Again, not to sound like a broken record, I’m all for the delay. Separately, the House Appropriations Committee recommended earmarking another $650 million to fund the transition, which is looking more and more like it will not happen on Feb. 17 as originally planned. This is all good stuff. Yesterday, according to published reports, even Nielsen, the ratings giant, told its members that the TV industry simply was not ready to pull off a seamless transition. Let’s face it: There were plenty of missteps along the way. Back in December, the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, which administers the DTV converter-box coupon program, notified Congress that it was about to run out of money. Great move: According to USA Today, the message fell on deaf ears. Congress was not in session. And just two weeks ago, when the NTIA actually did run out of money, leaving 2.1 million people who wanted the $40 coupons on a waiting list, that’s when all the angst grew. Yep, our government at work again.

Vlada Gelman http://www.tvweek.com I don’t know what’s so magical about June 12, but that’s the new date set by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, incoming chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, for the conversion of analog to digital signals. Again, not to... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.48489 2009-01-09T18:34:09Z 2009-01-09T19:36:23Z

This past summer I met a savvy and frugal college graduate. Having just landed his first job, he had no cable television in his first apartment. He also landed one of those $40 coupons to buy a digital converter box being offered by bricks-and-mortar retailers as well as online. After extensive research, he found that most of the retailers were selling the boxes for $80, not the $40 he said the government had led him to expect. But he bought one anyhow, choosing not to subscribe to cable, a more costly proposition. But there are millions of TV viewers who didn’t get one, and for now they cannot. The Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration is empty-handed, having spent its $1.34 billion budget, and has started a waiting list for those who still need coupons. Clearly the country, in the throes of a deep and long recession, is not ready for this transition. The nation’s new unemployment figures came out today, showing a 7.2% loss of jobs last month. Clearly people without jobs and without cable should not be pressured into subscribing to cable if they can’t get one of these coupons.

Vlada Gelman http://www.tvweek.com This past summer I met a savvy and frugal college graduate. Having just landed his first job, he had no cable television in his first apartment. He also landed one of those $40 coupons to buy a digital converter box... tag:www.tvweek.com,2009://23.48334 2009-01-06T19:37:48Z 2009-01-06T20:19:20Z

If we didn’t know for sure how bad things in the media economy are, the New York Times, the venerated gray lady of newspapers, sold its first front-page ad to CBS Television. The ad runs at the bottom of the page, spanning all six columns. As a longtime editor and journalist, I’ve had a history of battles with publishers who wanted to cross what has become an ever-blurring line between church and state. Not that this example is a blur of that line, for the CBS ad is clearly marked as an ad. I know a lot of journalists who are decrying the NYT’s decision, but I’m not one of them. Clearly media’s economics need tweaking during this pervasive recession, and if that ad keeps newspapers alive and prevents future job losses, I’m all for it. I’m sure this was a difficult decision for the Times, which is already mortgaging its real estate in New York and selling its 17% ownership in the Boston Red Sox. And for CBS, this was a coup. Am I wrong?

Vlada Gelman http://www.tvweek.com If we didn’t know for sure how bad things in the media economy are, the New York Times, the venerated gray lady of newspapers, sold its first front-page ad to CBS Television. The ad runs at the bottom of... tag:www.tvweek.com,2008://23.48129 2008-12-29T20:01:01Z 2008-12-29T20:22:07Z

Good piece in Sunday’s Los Angeles Times, which addressed, in part, why CNN’s Anderson Cooper doesn’t insert his opinion into his newscast, as so many of his cable news net cohorts do these days. The L.A. Times wondered why Cooper doesn’t interject his opinions into the news as do, say, Rachel Maddow and Campbell Brown, who are not at all shy about throwing their own two cents into the news of the day. Cooper’s answer was simple: “I’m just not interested as a viewer in listening to anchors’ opinions. It seems like there’s an awful lot of yelling, and this year yelling’s been replaced by sarcasm and snarkiness.” Amen, I say. Cooper said Maddow and Brown are both very good and talented at what they do, but that it’s just not his thing. Nor is blogging or Twittering. He admits to not being computer-savvy and prefers going to the frontline of a breaking news story in person. Personally, I think cable news could benefit from anchors who don’t use their role as a bully pulpit. And that’s why I will make a point of watching Cooper’s New Year’s Eve special, as the year will go down in history as one of a global recession and ever-increasing geopolitical angst.

Lisa Horowitz tvweek.com Good piece in Sunday’s Los Angeles Times, which addressed, in part, why CNN’s Anderson Cooper doesn’t insert his opinion into his newscast, as so many of his cable news net cohorts do these days. The L.A. Times wondered why Cooper...