Man, Ken Tucker of Entertainment Weekly absolutely lit into PBS in a column he posted late tonight.

Tucker contends that PBS' programming successes are little more than examples of "happy accident" that have generated a "misplaced pride" in the pubcaster, prexy Paula Kerger and "Masterpiece" exec producer Rebecca Eaton. An excerpt:

“We have a hit!” Eaton proclaimed during the "Downton Abbey" panel, and pronounced the promo clip shown — which shows the characters in the midst of World War I, some fighting on the front lines, others fighting over who has to clean which ponce’s bedroom — as being “more precious than gold.” Again, happy for Eaton, but why should she be surprised that her series can produce a hit? It should be spawning more of them, rather than waste time alienating viewers with its sad “re-branding” as Masterpiece Classic, Masterpiece Mystery, Masterpiece Contemporary, and, doubtless soon enough, Masterpiece Masterpiece.

I have to admit, I was taken aback. I've read Tucker for years and years – not every single piece he's written, but enough to have a good flavor for him. So I can't say for sure, but I'd be surprised if he's unleashed anything more seething than this piece. Perhaps I've been living under a rock, but I'm not sure I'm buying all of his arguments.

For one thing, the level of snide sarcasm seem out of place: There's a perfectly good argument for the re-branding of "Masterpiece" in different categories, and while perhaps it seems patronizing to Tucker and whoever shares his opinion, it seems much more harmless – I'd even argue useful – than alienating. Really, in this day and age of TV, we need to get angry about that?

In terms of more substantive issues, Tucker assails "Masterpiece" essentially for cribbing its best from the BBC, but doesn't the end justify the means to some extent? Should "Masterpiece" stop acquiring British masterpieces because that's the easy way out, even when no one else in the U.S. was interested in them? It's easy to say that "Masterpiece" should be producing more good programming, but in a year that featured weeks and weeks of superior programming such as "Downton," "Upstairs Downstairs" and "Sherlock," it's an odd time to find the anthology under such attack. 

Regarding "Downton" in particular, Tucker asserts that Eaton and Kerger didn't know what they had and marketed it accordingly, and that it's mostly fortuitous that viewers discovered it. There's no doubt that awareness of PBS programming could be better, but there seems to be no acknowledgment that there's any limitation to the network's marketing budget, or that putting more emphasis marketing on one program would take away from another.

Tucker goes on to criticize PBS itself for its programming choices, writing that "instead of coming up with a mixture of new, clever series and re-broadcasts from its storehouse of great old shows, PBS is hyping staid middlebrow fare such as an Andrea Bocelli concert as the high point of its 'Fall Arts Festival.'" Tucker seems guilty of selective evidence here – in terms of the Arts Fall Festival alone, I've seen little indication that PBS thinks Bocelli is the highpoint, or that the diversity and level of offerings can so easily be summed up as "staid middlebrow fare," or that no other worthwhile series surround it.

Tucker criticizes other PBS programs of recent vintage, not without justification, but makes the broader case that the "chopped-up, watered-down" special "The Best of Laugh-In" is representative of the network - even though throughout his column, he's conceding that this documentary or that news program is first-rate or, rather dismissively, the massive number of hours PBS devotes to children's programming "remains pretty good." In the end, all he sees is timid superficiality bordering on irrelevance.

His conclusion:

We know at least one reason why all this is. PBS doesn’t want to go back to the days in which it stirred things up, to the days when Bill Moyers and Marlon Riggs’ "Tongues Untied" and "An American Family" provoked audiences, and attracted the censure of politicians grandstanding to take away PBS’ small amount of government funding. Except for "Frontline" and the occasional Independent Lens and a few of the "American Masters" each season, PBS has ceded responsibility for aggressive programming dealing with current events or arts coverage with a forceful point of view (for the latter, I point you to Robert Hughes’ "The Shock of the New").

What should PBS do? I can think of a half-dozen things. But it doesn’t make any difference. As Kerger and PBS made clear over the past couple of days, it is committed to “nostalgia” (the hideous code-word for honoring the past by smothering it with gooey sentimentality).

I don't have a dog in this fight, nor do I doubt that Tucker watches much more PBS than I do and is better equipped to assess its value and direction. There's no doubt that, like any other network, PBS could not only do better, it could also be more courageous. But the fact is, in a year where half the nation's politicians were telling the American public that the network is worthless, viewership has improved 7% for PBS, and I'm having trouble believing that it's all because those viewers were too stupid to realize that PBS was pulling one over on them.

Tucker's column felt like a case of kicking the good guys for not being great – kicking them square in the you-know-what. Maybe I've just had blinders on and the heat is deserved - PBS isn't above having someone light a fire under it - but respectfully, it sure felt disproportionate to the crime.

Of all the programming coming in the next several weeks related to the 10th anniversary of 9/11, the most important for children might well be the special edition of "Nick News with Linda Ellerbee" scheduled for Sept. 1, "What Happened?: The Story of September 11, 2001."

The commercial-free special is designed to give children a tailor-made forum for emotions and understanding regarding the tragic events.

Ellerbee said she found there was all kinds of misinformation among kids about 9/11, such as "I heard that there were 500 planes that disappeared in the air."

"The most stunning one was, 'I heard that 9/11 never happened,'" Ellberbee said.

In her 20 years of producing groundbreaking news specials aimed at children, Ellerbee said she has learned not to talk down to children and not to be afraid to be straight with them. She also has a philosophy about addressing tragedy.

"Wherever you see bad stuff happening, you see good people trying to make it better," she said.

Dan Patrick joined Keith Olbermann on Current TV to discuss the recent book on ESPN, "Those Guys Have All the Fun." — and cast the ESPN movie.

No period costumes or beheadings in the next HBO series, "Enlightened." Just regular folk searching for sanity.

"I just thought it be would be funny to do a show about a person who comes back from a humiliating public experience and says, 'I'm not crazy,'" said exec producer and co-star Mike White.

White created the show with lead actress Laura Dern, who plays a woman trying to resume and make the best of her life after seeking treatment following a workplace meltdown. Suffice it to say, few are ready for her transformation.

"People put honesty on a pedestal, yet when you're inside of a character who's honest," Dern says, many will think "how unlikable that character that is.

"I see this series as very relatable. The aspiration is to try to be the best of ourselves. ... Mike's voice is a very earnest one about how we all long for it. The pitfalls are that she is very flawed."

The series almost inevitably will be a low-profile one for HBO, despite the presence of Dern and co-star Luke Wilson, but HBO is that rare place that can allow such a show to breathe, with Dern comparing the network to a "United Artists of the '70s." 

"There's just so many antiheroes, that to make noise in the dysfunction land you (almost) have to have a serial killer as the star of your show," White added. "To take someone who's not in a heroic job but just living a regular life ... That was an exciting idea to me."

BBC America's upcoming laffer "Friday Night Dinner" operates on the premise, as creator Robert Popper says, that "whenever you go home and whatever age you are, you revert to being kids." 

Popper practices - and confesses to - what he preaches. Popper said that in his own home, that includes he and his brother pulling their own hair out and dropping strands in his father's water glass.  

But the kids came by their dysfunction honestly. 

"I grew up in a household where my father would refuse to wear a shirt - ever," offers Popper as an example. And so when his pop sees "Friday Night Dinner" now, "he just watches it and goes, 'That's me.' "  

Simon Bird of "The Inbetweeners" plays one of the boys in "Dinner," once again becoming the victim in many situations but, Bird says, "much more comfortable in his own skin."  

A second season of "Dinner" has already been commissioned in the U.K. Bird is also co-writing another comedy, "Chickens," with "Inbetweeners" co-star Joe Thomas, which sounds more than a little promising. It's set, Bird said, in 1914 about "three men who don't go off to war ... set in a village of women who hate them."

AMC western series "Hell on Wheels," which premieres Nov. 6, will draw natural comparisons to HBO's "Deadwood," though perhaps the focus on the transcontinental railroad builders' ever-moving camp will offer up a much darker "MASH." 

One aspect that most intrigued the actors who spoke at the Television Critics Assn. panel for "Hell" today was the show's approach to post-Civil War racial issues.

"I feel a true responsibility to be as true as I can to what black Americans went through at that time," said Common, who plays an emancipated slave, "because we suffered through a lot of things but we also prevailed in a lot of things."

Anson Mount plays a former slave owner who finds himself tensely reunited with Common's character on the railroad build, which is being run by Colm Meaney's entrepreneur, Doc Durant.

"One of the things I find uncomfortable as an actor is taking on the (bigotry) of a character, which is something you must do," Meaney said. "If someone is a bigot and you must play that, it can be a little bit uncomfortable. I find that sort of surprising that it can be a bit unnerving."

Concluded Joe Gayton, one of the exec producers: "The key is not to shy away from it."

The trailer that Lifetime ran for “Five,” the cabler's film anthology about the impact of breast cancer that premieres Oct. 10, was simply as intense as you’ll find.

“This may be the most important film we’ve ever done,” Lifetime and History topper Nancy Dubuc said in introducing the project, which features segments directed by Jennifer Aniston, Alicia Keys, Demi Moore, Patty Jenkins and Penelope Spheeris.

The ensemble includes Patricia Clarkson, Rosario Dawson, Ginnifer Goodwin, Josh Holloway, Jennifer Morrison, Kathy Najimy, Bob Newhart, Annie Potts, Tony Shalhoub, Jeffrey Tambor and Jeanne Tripplehorn, who plays the oncologist who ties all five parts together.

“I had the full experience,” Tripplehorn said at the Television Critics Assn. press tour.

The trailer was typical in its construction –- say about a couple dozen snippets packed into a couple of minutes or so -– but the power of one moment after another to hit that emotional part of you was almost shocking.

Aniston is exec producing with Marta Kauffman, Paula Wagner, Kristin Hahn, Kevin Chindy and Francesca Silvestri. Some wondered how Kauffman, most famous for long-running laffer “Friends,” ended up on such a serious project, but the point of “Five” isn’t to be funereal from start to finish.

“When we are in the most extraordinary circumstances, we react in one of two ways,” Kauffman said. “Either we completely freak out, or we go toward humor. I tend to go toward humor – it’s my upbringing, it’s what I know. This is not irreverent, it’s not nipple jokes, it’s about women and in some cases their family members and their partners in extraordinary circumstances, and when you raise the stakes enough, it can be funny. It can be funny when a woman who has been diagnosed with breast cancer still has to deal with her mother.

“The humor isn’t slapstick. … It’s character humor and humor out of this very intense time in one’s life.”

Chuck Wepner, the inspiration of the “Rocky” films and the focal point of Oct. 25 ESPN Films documentary “The Real Rocky” (one of eight new docs the cabler is premiering this fall) provided the early highlights on the opening day of the Television Critics Assn. press tour.

Just a couple of moments:

Wepner was asked if he ever fought any Russians, akin to the Soviet boxer Ivan Drago that Rocky Balboa took on in “Rocky IV.” Wepner’s reply: “I did fight a couple of Russians, as a fighter and a bouncer.” 

Wepner also recalled his confidence for his big heavyweight title bout against Muhammad Ali, the direct model for the plot of Sylvester Stallone’s “Rocky.” Wepner bought some negligees for his wife and told her, “Tonight, you’re gonna be sleeping with the heavyweight champion of the world.”

After his 15^th-round loss to Ali, the Bayonne Bleeder returned to his hotel room. “When I came back," he recalled, "she was in one of the negligees and said, ‘Am I going to Ali’s room?’ ”

Past stars from "Survivor," "The Amazing Race" and "Big Brother" will join in a 5K mud run in Silverado, Calif. on Sept. 10 in support of Stand Up To Cancer.

CBS is sponsoring the "Reality Mud Run," in partnership with Around the World Prods., founded by "Survivor" alum Burton Roberts and "Amazing Race" grad Alex Boylan.

Other participants are scheduled to be Ethan Zohn, Jenna Morasca, Amanda Kimmel, Yau-Man Chan, Natalie Tenerelli, Phillip Sheppard, Chad Crittenden, Joel Klug, Uchenna Agu, Megan Rickey, Cheynne Whitney, Dennis Frentsos and Will Kirby.

"It's very rewarding to be able to use reality television as a platform to bring together my friends and raise money and awareness for cancer research.," said Zohn, winner of "Survivor: Africa" before overcoming Hodgkin's lymphoma.

As the News Corp phone hacking scandal broadens to include other Murdoch properties on Fleet Street, at least one newsman working stateside has been mentioned in connection with the privacy violations: CNN's Piers Morgan, who used to edit News Corp's Daily Mirror.

Forbes reported on Tuesday that a blogger had "a recording" that might constitute a smoking gun linking Morgan to the phone hacks, but now that the recording has surfaced - and it's a recording made by the BBC, not by a corporate espionage agent wearing a wire - has surfaced, that doesn't appear to be the case. If anything, Morgan simply seems a bit too candid.

It's a 2009 interview with BBC 4's "Desert Island Discs," Morgan told interviewer Kirsty Young when she asked about "all that nasty, down-in-the-gutter stuff," including phone hacking, that "a lot of it was done by third parties, rather than by the staff themselves.

That admission (and Morgan's stated sympathy for phone hacking scapegoat Clive Goodman in 2007) would be less scandalous if Morgan didn't appear to contradict his own statements from July 19: "I've never hacked a phone, told anyone to hack a phone, or published any stories based on the hacking of a phone," Morgan tweeted.

Morgan added the crucial escape clause "to my knowledge" to the tweet in a statement issued Wednesday, along with saying that his answer to Young was "not specific," to which we say "fair enough," although the "We didn't really do it, and anyway, Billy cheated on his homework, too" defense is pretty weak. I guess by "down-in-the-gutter-stuff," Morgan assumed Young was referring to poor sportsmanship on the cricket pitch.

Young's full question, with Morgan's answer:

Young: And what about this nice middle-class boy who would essentially have to be dealing with people who rake through bins for a living? People who tap people's phones, people who take secret photographs, who do all that nasty, down-in-the-gutter stuff?

Morgan: To be honest, let’s put that in perspective as well. Not a lot of that went on. A lot of it was done by third parties rather than the staff themselves. That’s not to defend it, because obviously you were running the results of their work. I’m quite happy to be parked in the corner of tabloid beast and to have to sit here defending all these things I used to get up to, and I make no pretence about the stuff we used to do. I simply say the net of people doing it was very wide, and certainly encompassed the high and the low end of the supposed newspaper market.

Morgain's statement on the back-and-forth:

"There is no contradiction between my comments on Kirsty Young's 'Desert Island Discs' show and my unequivocal statements with regard to phone-hacking. Millions of people heard these comments when I first made them in 2009 on one of the BBC's longest -running radio shows, and none deduced that I was admitting to, or condoning illegal reporting activity. Kirsty asked me a fairly lengthy question about how I felt dealing with people operating at the sharp end of investigative journalism. My answer was not specific to any of the numerous examples she gave, but a general observation about tabloid newspaper reporters and private investigators. As I have said before, I have never hacked a phone, told anyone to hack a phone, nor to my knowledge published any story obtained from the hacking of a phone."

The 2009 interview is here, and it's very interesting, notably the part in which Morgan recalls telling Prince William and Diana that "your mother is one of the most famous people in the world, and you (Diana, presumptively) are public property, I'm afraid, to an extent" and that he's "just going to have to live with it."

Sony Electronics has come aboard upcoming Fox series "The X Factor" as its official consumer-electronics sponsor, meaning the brand should get some generous on-air plugs come September. Sony joins Pepsi and Chevrolet, which have already signed on with Fox, Fremantle and Syco TV, as the official beverage and automotive sponsors. Unspecified is which specific Sony products will get "Factor" love and how they will be integrated with the broadcasts, but you can bet it will be as subtle as those Coke cups that just happen to be on the judges' table during "American Idol." Another branch of the Sony empire, Sony Music Entertainment, is already part of "Factor" through the $5 million deal the winner of the show will get with the record label.

In Variety, check out the story of Noah Z. Jones, who was plucked from relative obscurity in Maine to create "Fish Hooks," a top-rated DIsney Channel series. Here's an excerpt:

Who better to create a crazy world of fish in water than a fish who is very much out of water?

Noah Z. Jones was in Camden, Maine, minding his own business -- business that consisted of working on children's books and freelance illustrating -- when Disney dropped in some bait.

"It was an out-of-the-blue e-mail," recalls Jones, who was sitting at home one day when he got an e-mail from an executive at Disney asking him to pitch some shows.

"Your brain doesn't know what to do with that information," Jones says.

That e-mail ultimately led to "Fish Hooks," Disney Channel's unusual but successful underwater high-school animated series, which Jones created and co-exec produces. "Fish Hooks" is the No. 2 animated series in TV in the 6-11 and 9-14 demos, trailing only channel-mate "Phineas and Ferb."

It wasn't as if Jones could never imagine being involved with television some day, but the key word there is "imagine."

"It was so far from what I considered a possibility," Jones says. "I always had ideas, but it's kind of like when you're a kid pretending to be an astronaut." ...

Read the rest here.

 

WB just released this "trailer" for "The Flaming C," the ongoing build-up of Conan O'Brien's animated alter-ego.

This "iCarly" clip is from months ago, but to quote the most logical statement in TV history, "If you haven't seen it, it's new to you."

Just in time for next week's launch of the annual Television Critics Assn. summer press tour, I have completed my viewing of 34 broadcast network pilots for the 2011-12 season. While heeding the networks’ admonition not to review the pilots in their preseason condition (because they're subject to tweaking before their premieres), here are the shows that, in my view, have the least or most to work on.

Several of these were just not going to be my cup of tea no matter what, but they could still succeed with viewers overall. On the other hand, I'm already bracing myself for another painful cancellation of a Kyle Killen series: last season "Lone Star," this season "Awake." The dark NBC drama doesn't arrive until midseason, but it's not too early to start the "Save the Show" campaign for that one.

Cream of the early crop (5)
ABC: “Once Upon a Time”
Fox: “New Girl,” “Terra Nova”
NBC: “Awake,” “Smash”

Sticking with for now, but have more (maybe much more) to prove (12)
ABC: "Apt. 23,” “Man Up,” “Pan Am,” “Revenge,” “Suburgatory”
CBS: “2 Broke Girls,” “A Gifted Man”
CW: “Hart of Dixie,” “Ringer”
NBC: “Bent,” “Free Agents,” “Prime Suspect”

Not for me (12)
ABC: “The River,” “Scandal,” “Work It”
CBS: “Person of Interest,” “Unforgettable”
CW: “The Secret Circle”
Fox: “Alcatraz,” “The Finder” (backdoor pilot)
NBC: “Grimm,” “The Playboy Club,” “Up All Night,” “Whitney”

Really not for me (5)
ABC: “Charlie’s Angels,” “GCB,” “Last Man Standing”
CBS: “How To Be a Gentleman”
Fox: “I Hate My Teenage Daughter”

In the spirit of constructive criticism — since these are supposedly works in progress — here are three pieces of “who asked you?” advice (believe me, I have more):

“Revenge”: Drop the voiceover, which is adding a layer of cheese you don’t need. The soapy characters and stories speak for themselves, but you’ve got a chance to lure viewers who are more interested in straight drama if you can just let go of this one unnecessary level of melodrama. Watching those same scenes with the voiceover muted, they're actually more powerful.

“2 Broke Girls”: I know it’s anathema tell a comedy “don’t try so hard for the laughs,” but don’t try so hard for the laughs. Or at least don’t let us see the effort so clearly. The more natural this show gets, the better.

“Smash”: You’re absolutely one of my frosh favorites, but in the middle of the show there’s a number that the characters get really excited about, and it’s utterly unfathomable to this character, before, during and after that number, why that is.

MLB commissioner Bud Selig had an overflow of reasons for rejecting a proposed 17-year television rights extension between Fox and Los Angeles Dodgers owner Frank McCourt, according to the 11-page June 20 letter Selig sent to McCourt. The letter was posted by the Los Angeles Times today.

"While any one of the factors identified below would alone give me serious pause," Selig wrote, "collectively ... they demonstrate overwhelmingly that the proposed transaction is neither in the long-term interests of the franchise nor consistent with the best interests of the game of baseball."

Selig noted that McCourt was rushing into the Fox deal because of his "desperate need for immediate cash" to address his and the Dodgers' financial problems, without waiting for the period starting on November 30, 2012 when he could solicit other, potentially more lucrative offers through competitive bidding. Selig notes the mega-deal that the Los Angeles Lakers struck for their TV rights through such a process.

"In fact, as your chief financial offcer told representatives of my office on April 5, 2011," Selig said, "you would not even be considering a media rights transaction at ths time were it not for the club's 'financial duress.' "

Selig also stated that the $385 million up-front payment that McCourt would receive upon signing the deal "far exceeds any up-front payment previously received by any other club," adding that "no other owner has sacrificed so much of his team's future for an immediate payoff."

"I am concerned that at some point," Selig wrote, "(the Dodgers) will be unable to adapt to unexpected circumstances because you have accelerated such a substantial amount of its media revenues."

Selig's letter also quotes 2009 testimony from McCourt's divorce proceeding against Jamie McCourt, when current Dodgers vice chairman Jeff Ingram said that McCourt "noted that Fox has very tough negotiators, they're very smart and he's not convinced we would get a very good deal from Fox at this time to do a capital raise, and that we'd hamstring the business in the future by getting them to do something now."

Selig then delved into McCourt's plan to put the 35% equity interest in Fox Sports Net West 2 that the Dodgers would receive into a holding company separate from the franchise, as well as his plan to take at least 45% from the $385 million up-front payment to settle personal debts.

And, Selig took pains to note that the McCourt's proposed divorce settlement with Jamie McCourt had the potential of a court-supervised sale of the team beginning in August — yet the next owner would be stuck with the Fox deal without a dime of the $385 million.

There's even more, but by now, you get the idea.

"Your (June 18 letter) asserts, without explanation or support, that I should not take into account the Dodgers' current financial condition and operational state," Selig wrote. "Apparently you believe that I should make these decisions in a vacuum, without the context of the relevant facts and circumstances related to the Dodgers. To me, that makes no sense. It is not the manner in which I have approached decisions concerning matters involving other clubs, each of which has turned on the unique circumstances of the particular club."

McCourt took the Dodgers into bankruptcy one week later.

The Paley Center for Media is launching a new PaleyFest Family series Aug. 13-14, with a day of Disney Channel show panels followed by a day devoted to Cartoon Network series.

The usual special screenings and appearances by cast members and creatives that accompany the main PaleyFest will be a part of PaleyFest Family, along with post-panel autograph sessions.

The schedule:

Aug. 13
12 noon         "Phineas and Ferb"
2:30 p.m.       "Fish Hooks"
5 p.m.            "Good Luck Charlie"

Aug. 14
12 noon         "Ben 10"
2:30 p.m.       "Dude, What Would Happen"
5 p.m.            "Adventure Time"

NFL owners have approved a 10-year labor deal with the league's players, bringing professional football to the brink of labor peace.

A vote from the players could come as soon as tonight, ending the lockout that began March 11.

The NFL's annual Hall of Fame exhibition game has been canceled, but it appears that the remainder of exhibition play and the entire regular season would run intact.

The deal would bring a sigh of relief to CBS, Fox, NBC, ESPN and the NFL Network, all of whom use the NFL as bellwether programming. By the end of the year, bidding is also expected to begin on a new eight-game package for Thursdays that will launch in 2012.

Jon Stewart wonders why we ever wanted to get away ... "That's your C-Span??!!"

I spent a fascinating morning at the Social TV Summit, where an impressive gathering of digital-minded folks from networks and studios convened for panel discussions delving into the intricacies of this emerging category.

For those that don't know, "social TV" is a catch-all term for digital content experiences that supplement and drive greater engagement with the TV programs it was feared they would once cannibalize. Examples range from "second screen" applications that offer companion content to what's on air to social-media tools that harness the conversation about shows already going on via Facebook or Twitter.

There was a vaguely self-congratulatory tone to the whole day, and why not given the heady $40-50 billion one of the event's organizers, analyst Jack Myers, projected for social-marketing spending by 2020. As the myriad ways TV could be transformed were discussed, a recurring theme was how inherently social TV is.

But I'm not so sure about that.

Don't get me wrong. I've had some great social TV experiences, particularly on Twitter to partake in watercooler moments from the Super Bowl to the breaking news of Osama bin Laden's assassination. And I've also had some truly horrible social-TV experiences though I won't name names--names that were cited today as shining examples--only because to me essentially this entire category is in beta.

But even once social-TV has perfected its technology, I think there's one fundamental attribute to the medium standing in the way that was totally overlooked at the conference: TV isn't so much social as it is passive. And I can't help but wonder whether that will remain the dominant mode for TV consumption until the end of time.

Exciting as all the "lean-forward" opportunities are, I have the nagging suspicion that they will apply to only a sub-segment of the overall viewing population, as well as a sub-segment of the many different kinds of TV programming out there.

Television was more or less discussed at the Social TV Summit in monolithic terms that didn't distinguish between the very varied experiences the medium has to offer. Being engrossed in a character-driven drama series, for example, is entirely different than watching a sporting event, and my guess is the latter is far more conducive to at least synchronous social-TV applications. The conference smartly pointed out a number of times that there's going to be different kinds of social experiences when a program is on and off.

At one point early in the day there was a telling exchange between Somrat Niyogi, CEO of check-in app Miso, and Adam Cahan, VP of Yahoo Media products, in which Niyogi conceded, "I don't think people want to share every single thing that they want to watch," drawing laughs as he held out the hypothetical of a "Jersey Shore" fan who may not want the world to know he or she enjoys the show. But Cahan countered, "People are going to share a lot more than they do today," noting that a similar cultural shift has already been put into motion by Facebook, whose members share the minutiae of their lives in a way they would have thought twice about a few years ago.

The truth is they're both right. There's going to be people who don't want to make their TV consumption habits public and others who will do so without blinking. But the sensitivity here may not be so much around privacy as it is taking a pursuit that for most people is not about expending any effort. There's a reason kicking back in front of the boob tube is called "vegging out."

This isn't meant to dampen enthusiasm for social TV as much as it a call for some perspective. I'm rooting for this sector and excited to watch its progress. But I'm also leery that expectations are a wee out of whack with the realities of the TV audience.

John Skipper, ESPN’s exec VP of content, sat down with Variety recently to talk about all things ESPN, the TV sports landscape, the chances of the Super Bowl ending up on cable and what demographic the network sees as an untapped viewer base.

Q: In broad strokes, how do you see the TV sports landscape right now?
JS: I actually see sports as a very attractive segment in entertainment because it’s live. That’s why things are so active in sports right now, why ratings generally are up and why there’s generally more competition than ever for rights. Lots of companies — whether it be Turner, TruTV, FX, NBC Comcast with Versus — everyone wants in with sports because in a world where you have the ability to control when you watch something, live sports breaks through in a way that’s only going to continue to become more valuable. We’re very bullish, obviously, but our actions reflect our bullishness. We continue to buy rights, start new businesses and push into new platforms because we believe sports is a driver for all of that.

Q: Where do you see your future competition coming from?
JS: We see our competition in a number of places. I mean there is competition for eyeballs on television, for buying rights, on the Internet from social media companies and on videogames. We still think the way to break through all that competition is to own live rights and then build studio content around those live rights. That way you drive people to the network with live games and you keep them for “SportsCenter,” “SportsNation,” “PTI” and “E:60.”

Q: Do the sports leagues, such as the NFL, have you under the gun because they know how badly you want and need those rights to keep your dominance?
JS: The NFL is really good for us and we need to have it. On the other hand, we have a very broad portfolio across a lot of sports. We have significant agreements with about 30 big conferences, leagues, commissions and associations. We have a pretty good diversified portfolio, and that does help you a little bit, certainly in terms of your leverage with the leagues. We believe that the deals we have now work for us, even though some of them are expensive. We don’t do deals unless it works within our overall financial structure and offers returns we need to deliver to the Walt Disney Co. and its shareholders. While leagues have leverage and their content is exclusive, we also have leverage.

Q: With Turner quite possibly being a player for the next NFL package, do you expect prices to go up?
JS: I think there will always be competition for NFL packages. I only know what I read in the press. I actually have no inside knowledge other than it appears that the NFL has been offering other eight-game package. I think it’s highly logical that Turner would interested and NBC Comcast would be interested, as well as other parties.

Q: Years ago it was assumed a Super Bowl would never come to cable. Yet now, with ESPN holding the rights to the BCS Championship Game, could you see that happening?
JS: I could certainly envision it. It makes me happy, but I don’t see it happening in the near to medium term. The NFL has been very clear that they don’t see putting the Super Bowl in the perceivable future on cable.

Q: Did you find it surprising that NBC won the recent Olympics bid? And the timing was certainly interesting, with Dick Ebersol leaving the network right before the bidding began. It was clearly a big offer ($4.4 billion for the next four available Games, through 2020).
JS: I think whether he was there or not, it’s a very critical product for NBC Comcast. It’s core for the NBC sports brand. They’ve had it for a long time. I think with Dick Ebersol leaving, in some ways it had the opposite effect of what people thought. “Oh my gosh, Dick is gone,” and that mean the Olympics are at risk. It’s still a critical product for them whether he was there or not. I think they understood that, and that’s reflected in the price they paid. Was I surprised at the price they paid? Well, it’s clear from what we did that we believed the value was below where they paid. We couldn’t make the numbers work at anywhere near that level. Again, it might have value beyond a simple P&L for them. I believe they can use content on Versus, but we didn’t see the value they did. So yes, we were a little surprised at the price.

Q: ESPN has made a big international push lately, especially with acquisition of the Premier League. How do you see that push going forward? Is that a major objective for the network?
JS: The world’s getting smaller, of course, and we’re finding that people here care about sports that have traditionally been international. First off there’s soccer — the World Cup and next summer we’re doing the European championships. We do some Mexican soccer on ESPN Deportes. Changing demographic patterns mean people care about other sports. We had a real big success with our news and information with the cricket World Cup; huge traffic on ESPN.com. We think people are increasingly caring about international sports and we like to do more on ESPN3.com. It’s the perfect platform to do Latin baseball or any number of sports. So, yes, we are going to continue to push international sports.

Q: With sporting events starting so late now and young fans not being able to watch the conclusion of nighttime game on TV, is it fair to blame the networks?
JS: Well the research is actually completely contradictory to what people always say about this. The research tells you to go late, and, of course, most of this comes from the East Coast guys. People forget that a lot of the population in this country is in other time zones, where it’s not too late. There is no research evidence to suggest that there’s any ratings lost and, in fact, the young audience tends to pick up later in the night. Maybe 11-year-old kids are up when they shouldn’t be. We have made the decision many times to go early because we think it feels like a good idea and it’s a good PR move. In last year’s NBA Final, we put a game on at 7 o’clock and it actually hurt ratings.

Q: It feels like you’re losing a generation of fans. A game ends at 12:30 a.m. in the East Coast and they miss a lot of that excitement.
JS: I hear you and it sounds logical. Every time I try to do it, my program the department goes, “You’re going to kill the rating.” We have done it a few times because it’s good PR.

Q: Do you see Versus as your main competition right now and in gathering more sports rights, such as Wimbledon, is that part of the objective in trying to keep your distance ahead of them?
JS: Anybody’s who’s bidding against us is a competitor. In terms of resources, Fox has enormous resources, NBC Comcast has big resources, Turner does. The thing about Versus is, right now, it’s the only other 24/7, 365, multisports network. So I think that’s why people sort of go, “They more look like you than anybody else.” But lots of people are competing. I think Versus has the interest but they’ve professed they’re not trying to compete with us. But they don’t deny that they are trying to be a 24/7, 356, multisport channel, so, yeah we consider that to be competitive. With Wimbledon, we wanted to do what we just did for a long time, way before NBC decided to merge with Comcast. Rhetorically, I often say we don’t recognize the distinction between cable and broadcast. For the deal we just made with the Pac-12, Fox agreed with us. There is no broadcast package and no cable package. We’re buying games, we have a bunch of assets and we’re going to put those games on whatever assets we want to put them on. For the Olympics, while we did have a significant component of events we were going to put on ABC, our agreement with the Olympics was that we could put content anywhere. We could put it all on cable if we wanted to. So to go back to your question about the Super Bowl, while it isn’t going on cable anytime soon, almost everything else is fair game.

Q: What else is on your mind these days?
JS: We’ve made a big commitment to the West Coast over the last 2-3 years. Moved the latenight “SportsCenter” here and doing some ESPN Deportes shows from here. We also launched (website) Grantland out of here. We moved about half of our content and development group out here.

Q: What do you think the reason is behind that?
JS: We want to feel even more national. We want a presence from the East Coast to the West Coast. We’re going to have a presence in Texas starting this fall (with the Longhorn Network). We’re starting a new show in Miami and we do “PTI” out of Washington, D.C.

Q: Has there been a feeling ESPN was too Northeast in its thinking?
JS: I think that we always battle a little perception that we’re Northeast-centric. We are located in the Northeast and a lot of our employees come from the Northeast, so it would be hard to simply dismiss it entirely, but we don’t think we have any significant East Coast bias. Nobody does more West Coast, Midwest games or Southern games than us.

Q: Have you seen any a “SportsCenter” ratings bump for the West Coast broadcast?
JS: Yes, the West Coast ratings are up. They’re doing a great broadcast. We want to have a presence here. We just did the ESPY’s, and we’re starting ESPN L.A. and ESPN Deportes L.A. Demographics matter. L.A. is one of the major Hispanic capitals of this country, so that’s why we’re doing some Deportes here. We feel like there is some growth there for us.

 

A year ago, Variety ran a story that praised certain television shows for their ability to be funny while working within smallscreen standards-and-practices parameters. While mainstream film was increasingly getting its laughs from pure raunch -- hello, "Hangover" -- TV shows like "Modern Family" and "Parks and Recreation" were finding ways to crack us up without going blue.

Of course, just as there are some mainstream film comedies that do keep it clean, there are some comedies on the smallscreen where there seems to be no limit to how sexual, profane or crass they can be. FX might be ground zero for this with "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," "Louie" and "Wilfred." The pay channels are no slouches, either – look no further than this coming Sunday's unbelievably bold "Curb Your Enthusiasm" for pure audaciousness (not just politically, but sexually).

Among the top examples of "Hangover" humor on TV is "The Inbetweeners," the BBC America comedy airing Saturdays this summer (and currently being remade into an MTV adapation). I'm not sure you'll find anything more crude on American television today — perhaps it seems even more brash because the main characters are school-age kids. But it really is downright funny, with every bit of coarseness built upon cleverness.

The final thought I can't excape is that you go see "Hangover II" or "Bridesmaids," get your shock to the system and your laughs, but after a couple of hours, it's all over. And in the end, your film comedy options throughout the year are few and far between — while on TV, the crazy party goes on and on. Even in what might be feature film's wheelhouse of blue comedy, I'm not sure television doesn't do it better.

 

George R. R. Martin has been teasing fans a few years now with riddles like this one (warning: really elaborate spoiler for one very minor plot point). The actor half of the clue (it's role first, then actor. I don't want to get into it. It makes my head hurt) reads thusly: "He knew Indiana Jones, has hung with droids and jedi, thrice contended for a Larry, winning once. He's been a knight (often), an archbishop (twice), a dean, a priest, a doctor."

Consensus among the GRRM commentariat seems to be that this points to Oliver Ford Davies. From commenter Stefan Radermacher:

He was Sio Bibble in "Star Wars",  he played a ship's captain in an episode of the "Young Indiana Jones Chronicles", he played archbishops in "Johnny English" and "Bertie and Elizabeth", her was the Dean of Windsor in "Mrs Brown", and he was Doctor Harris in "Sense and Sensibility". He also played various knighted characters on different movies or TV shows (like "Sir Richard Bowman" on Spooks, for example). Also, he won the Laurence Olivier Award in 1990, and was nominated in 2003 and 2007.

Most folks also think the role being riddled is that of Maester Cressen, a kind of court doctor character who first appears in the prologue to "A Clash of Kings" (which will be the subject of the second season of the HBO show).

If you are an IMDB whiz, check out grrm.livejournal.com whenever you get a yen to put your skills to the test; the clues are quite elaborate and you'll usually come back with some kind of not-yet-available info about the show.

Pic via the ever-dependable Meme Generator.

HBO has announced "Mel Brooks and Dick Cavett Together Again," an hourlong conversation of anecdotes and observations filmed before a live audience last year at the Saban Theatre in Los Angeles, will premiere Sept. 9.

Steve Haberman and Rudy DeLuca have produced for Brooksfilms Prods.

Below, Brooks and Cavett together for one of the first times (along with Robert Altman, Peter Bogdanovich and Frank Capra), four decades ago:

Watching a movement to save a canceled TV show is a little like watching a squirrel fighting for its life after being hit by a truck. No matter how much you're rooting for that squirrel, it's more than a little painful to witness (even if you send for "the special really tiny instruments").

The new squirrel on the highway is "Men of a Certain Age," which was canceled by TNT on Friday. The "Save Men of a Certain Age" Facebook page is off to the rescue, complimented by more save-the-show e-mails to me (and therefore, I assume, to many others) than I've seen perhaps in my entire time working at Variety.

The arguments for the show are considerable as far as its quality goes. It was a good show that only seemed to get better with time, and heck, we've all got time to spare. Stuart Levine of Variety noted a couple of weeks ago that "Men" has legacy potential going forward that perhaps nothing else on TNT can offer (especially with this year's upcoming retirement of "The Closer.") Mo Ryan of AOLTV and Alan Sepinwall of HitFix.com also made impassioned, preemptive arguments on its behalf before the axe came down last week.  I would say the last time we saw this much movement on behalf of a show, before and after the fact, was with FX's "Terriers."

Which, of course, brings us back to the squirrel.  "Terriers" was canceled not for any lack of love or appreciation from its network, but because the ratings, no matter how you sliced them, were dismal. (FX prexy John Landgraf even held a telephone wake with reporters to lament this fact.) There probably isn't anyone who doesn't wish the inconsistent scheduling of "Men" had been different or wonder if better scheduling could goose its viewership, but there's little evidence that TNT could find a scheduling pattern that would make a significant difference.

In any case, that ship has sailed, and the main goal of the "Save MOACA" movement is to convince another network to pick the show up (something that exec producer and co-creator Mike Royce told Ryan would be explored, however tentatively.)  It's less crazy to think that "Men" might find a better fit on some other network. AMC seems to a particular target for some fan campaigners, though -– heck, call me crazy -- but now that ESPN Classic is showing "Friday Night Lights" reruns, maybe that network of viewers looking longingly back at their past while contemplating their future might make sense for "Men." Or even more so, the Golf Channel, whose viewers might relate to the quest of Ray Romano's character to make the sport's senior tour. 

You know, if you can make the economics work.  No problem there ...

There's no doubt that after 22 episodes dating back to 2009, "Men" has hardly exhausted its potential. I've already paid my respects, but count me among the fans who hope that the cynic in me is wrong and that they bring this squirrel back to life. For "Men of a Certain Age," life shouldn't stop at 22.

Fans of the AMC series "Breaking Bad" know to expect audacious creative choices, but the product placement near the end of its fourth season premiere last night must have left some raised eyebrows, particularly on Madison Avenue.

In a scene of inspired black comedy, its protagonists cap a long night filled with murder and mayhem with a meal at a restaurant identified repeatedly during a four-minute scene as Denny's. The national chain apparently paid to be known as the official dining choice of homicidal drug dealers.

If you missed the episode (and shame on you for that), picture the comedic contrast of a cozy pancake breakfast preceded by character Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul) shooting and killing a rival chemist at the order of his partner, Walter White (Bryan Cranston), followed by their using chemicals to liquefy the body of a henchman whose throat was slit right in front of them by their boss. And to underscore the contrast, "Bad" cuts from a shot of the guys mopping up blood at the meth lab to Jesse sopping up ketchup with a french fry.

As Walt tried to convince Jesse that the murder was necessary to save their own necks, the Denny's logo was like a third character on camera, appearing in the window outside their table and on posters either both of their shoulders inside the restaurant. The only thing that would have made the placement less subtle might have been AMC chief Charlie Collier walking by with a check sticking out of his breast pocket.

Creatively speaking, the scene was hysterical though risky given how touchy producers get about any kind of brand-plugging on TV's artier shows. If you'll recall, "Mad Men" creator Matthew Weiner fought AMC to keep brand integration off his own show but apparently "Bad" executive producer Vince Gilligan has no such reservations. That'll surely get him in good graces with AMC, which must appreciate a showrunner willing to cut a creative corner in order to cushion the financial burden.

But what was Denny's thinking? As brand integrations go, it was either ballsy or stupid. Maybe it's that rare marketers that can understand cable programming's murky moral calculus, where even meth-mixing murderers are the good guys. But since when does Madison Avenue grasp that kind of grey area?

This story was updated Saturday at 9:50 a.m. PT, see below.

While the surprising announcement Friday of Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony splitting up had many wondering about the fate of their 3-year-old twins, another one of their creations faces an uncertain future: "Q'Viva! The Chosen," a TV series they had been shooting and producing together over the summer (see video above).

"Q'Viva" is an "American Idol"-style unscripted performance/competition series with a Latin flavor the couple announced back in April with XIX Entertainment, run by "Idol" executive producer Simon Fuller, and global production giant Endemol. Lopez and Anthony were said to be on a three-month shoot over the summer in which they were to scout talent all over the globe in preparation of bringing back the best and brightest for a live production. From the clip above, it seemed they were functioning as hosts of the show.

When and where "Q'Viva" would air was an open question, but the ambitious intent was that 21 different countries around the world were to air it simultaneously in three different languages. However, network partners were never named. Blackberry maker Research in Motion was on board as a sponsor.

"Q'Viva" was touted as capturing "the drama and intense emotions of the incredible stories and personal journeys that Jennifer and Marc uncover." Now that  promotional blather has unintended meaning, one that could have real consequences for the production. Given the "intense emotions" may have been of the bi-directional variety between Lopez and Anthony, the program could become of even greater interest now that it's conceivable that the "Q'Viva" shoot provided the backdrop to the dissolution of their marriage.

Even in the likely event that the footage of these two--who have always seemed to be consummate professionals--betrays no signs of their distress, "Q'Viva!" will still carry a tabloid-friendly marketing hook. How that affects the release of the series remains to be seen; inquiries made to XIX Entertainment and Endemol have yet to be returned.

The Lopez-Anthony split will also inevitably spill into coverage of whether Lopez is returning for another season of "Idol." A flurry of reports published Monday suggested her coming back was a done deal, but Fox has been mum on the subject.

UPDATE: A spokesman for Fuller's XIX Entertainment responded early Saturday that "Q'Viva!" is "going ahead with both of them as planned" and that the company would issue a statement next week with more details.

2nd UPDATE: An XIX Entertainment rep clarified Monday that while the shoot was initially scheduled to occur over the summer, it was rescheduled to take place in the fall and that it is still scheduled to continue with both Lopez and Anthony despite their split. While that may or may not put a pin in the provocative-footage theory advanced above--there may still be footage of the two of them together though the actual shoot didnt' take place--it will be all the more interesting to the show's buyers if "Q'Viva!" manages to reunite the couple for further filming.

From the Grantland oral history of "Friday Night Lights":

Eric Shanks (former Executive Vice President of Entertainment, DirecTV): We were at the Sundance Film Festival. Tom Arnold, me, and Ben Silverman were having Chinese food somewhere. Ben was talking about how Friday Night Lights was on the bubble, and that the audience was passionate but not huge. He didn't know if it could support a network audience anymore. We just kind of cooked up the idea of DirecTV and NBC partnering on the show right there over Chinese food. Actually, Tom Arnold gets all the credit because he was the guy that set up the dinner and put everybody together.

This video featuring "Peep Show" star David Mitchell is a year old, but it was just forwarded to me today, so that makes it immediately relevant. Truly, the message is timeless.

Maybe it's a coincidence that NBC chose the day of Emmy nominations to announce the casting of singer Sara Bareilles as the third judge on unscripted series "The Sing-Off." Or maybe the network is hoping Emmy hoopla will overshadow a bungled opportunity to revitalize a property that needed a shot in the arm in order to compete in a critical time slot.

NBC Entertainment chairman Robert Greenblatt surprised many by drafting "Sing-Off," which had performed respectably when scheduled multiple nights per week in the not-quite-competitive month of December, and turn it into a two-hour building block on the fall schedule.  He acknowledged during a press conference ahead of its upfront presentation in May that the network was looking to bring in a big name to join the judges and spark some fresh interest in the show.

That was the right idea, but what happened to the execution? Bareilles is the farthest thing from a household name, and neither are returning judges Ben Folds and Shawn Stockman. She's replacing Nicole Scherzinger, who's off to a show that understands the power a provocative figure can singlehandedly bring to a show: Fox's "The X Factor."

Had NBC been able to draft someone the caliber of Christina Aguilera, who has certainly been a draw on "The Voice," this series might have actually had a chance to get some fresh eyes.

Now NBC looks more vulnerable than ever in a two-hour block on Monday (beginning Sept. 19), which will undoubtedly weaken a pretty high-profile launch at 10 p.m., "The Playboy Club." Given how much firepower the Peacock's rivals are bringing to the night, between Fox's "Terra Nova" to ABC's "Dancing With the Stars," maybe this is just the Peacock lying down and playing dead rather than investing in a night on which they can't put up a fight.

And if the NFL gets its act together in time for ESPN to kick off "Monday Night Football," it will be all the more appropriate that NBC has elected to punt.

Some first-look notes on today's Emmy nominations:

--In its fifth and final season, critcally beloved "Friday Night Lights" gets its first drama series nom — a rare breakthough for a series that old. Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton paved the way with their lead acting noms in 2010, which were repeated this year.

-- "Modern Family" grabbed four of six comedy supporting actor nominations (Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Ed O'Neill, defending champ Eric Stonestreet and Ty Burrell), but Nick Offerman of "Parks and Recreation" is snubbed

-- All six comedy series nominations were broadcast shows.

-- "The Big Bang Theory" not only gets its first Emmy series nom, a year later than expected, but Johnny Galecki joins defending champ Jim Parsons with a nom.

-- Louis C.K. was the most pleasant of surprises as he gets a nomination for lead comedy actor in his first year with "Louie" on FX.

-- Steve Carell bids farewell to "The Office" with his sixth lead comedy actor nomination; he's still looking for victory No. 1.

-- Hugh Laurie isn't leaving "House," but he has the same stats as Carell for lead drama actor with "House."

-- Matt LeBlanc, thrice nominated for lead comedy actor with "Friends," gets one for "Episodes."

-- "Luther" is a disappointing omission from the minis/movies category, but Idris Elba got a lead minis/movie actor nom and a guest comedy actor nom for "The Big C."

-- Ten nominations for much-lambasted miniseries "The Kennedys," including two for lead actors Greg Kinnear and Barry Pepper.

-- Elisabeth Moss, nominated as lead drama actress in 2009 and supporting drama actress in 2010 for "Mad Men," returns to a lead nom this year.

-- Betty White, supporting comedy actress nominee.

-- Guest drama actress nominees include Miss Blakenship of "Mad Men": Randee Heller.

-- "Mildred Pierce" dominated with the most nominations of any program, 21, which will make for an interesting competition with PBS' "Downton Abbey." "Mildred got six acting noms: Kate Winslet, Guy Pearce, Brian F. O'Byrne, Evan Rachel Wood, Melissa Leo and Mare Winningham.

-- People might not have liked her season finale, but Veena Sud of "The Killing" got a writing nom for her pilot. It was the only drama pilot nominated in the writing category.

Politcos weren’t the only folks making robocalls this week. John Goodman was also dialing up potential viewers, asking them to watch his latest series, "Damages."

The star of the new season of the Glenn Close starrer was alerting potential auds about the new season that launched Wednesday night on DirecTV. The former FX series begins its fourth season, this time on the satcaster after the cabler canceled the series due to low ratings.

The marketing strategy isn’t a new one, but is it effective?

Jon Gieselman, DirecTV’s senior VP of advertising and PR, said the technique is a “throwback to Home Shopping Network. It’s not a sales call. We view it as a customer service tactic, letting people know that ‘Damages’ is exclusively on DirecTV.”

The exec said his team auto-called subscribers from the 19 mllion-plus DirecTV database who met a certain demographic criteria — likely desirable ZIP codes and household incomes. Costs are relatively low and the reach can be great.

As for whether broadcast and cable networks will take up this type of campaign as the fall season launches, hoping to help auds cut through the clutter, one showbiz marketing pro thought it was doubtful, calling the technique “invasive.”

“Do they help sway political leanings when you hear these calls?” the exec asked. “Once you start hearing those, you immediately hang up.”

Head over to TeamCoco.com, online home for Conan O'Brien, and you'll notice a countdown clock is ticking down for The Flaming C. That's the nom de superhero for the TBS talk show host, who concocted the character last year with Warner Bros. Animation complete with a uniform outfitted with a oven glove, jai alai pelota and fishnet stockings. We can only pray that what's been an occasional appearance on his show will now have a regular home online. To tide yourself over in the meantime, catch up below on a previous supernatural incarnation of O'Brien's back in his NBC days alongside comedian Jim Gaffigan. Behold, "Pale Force"...

 
 William Hurt, Ethan Hawke, Gillian Anderson and Donald Sutherland will appear in Encore's first original miniseries, "Moby Dick," premiering Aug. 1 on Encore.

The project will mark Encore's foray into original programming, details of which you can read about here.

Chalk up another one for Brian Williams: Kate Snow is jumping from Dateline to Williams' new primetime show. While we're waiting for this thing to get a start date, I think it's about time our readers started pulling their weight and began suggesting titles.

"Datenight?"

"Lineline?"

"60 More Minutes?"

"Brian Williams and the Electric Mayhem?"

I'm waiting here, people. Will repost the best suggestions, if there is a large enough plurality of same.

Viewers watching the Fox telecast of the MLB All-Star Game just got their first glimpse at the network's highly anticipated fall series "The X Factor," so it feels appropriate to borrow some baseball terminology to describe this marketing effort.

Swing and a miss!

This was Fox's first chance to set expectations for "Factor" being something worthy of the hype and instead this "world premiere preview" comes off as little more than a pale imitation of the series it really needs to distinguish itself from, "American Idol." There's nothing in the 2:30 clip that generates any real excitement.

Sure, it's a cute comedic conceit to have the clip seem like "Factor" will present a kindler, gentler Simon Cowell, who is seen in its opening moments lavishing a mediocre singer with the same generous platitudes the judge he's reuniting with here, Paula Abdul, would bestow. "I love your spirit," he tells a cute kiddie belting out "The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow" in an audition.

But then Cowell is seen waking up and reflecting on the fact he's just had a nightmare; cue guitar riffs from "Live and Let Die" and we are reassured he's the same old evil Cowell, who is then seen ripping into contestant after contestant with the same demonic zeal that made him famous on "Idol."

The problem is it's the SAME demonic zeal--there is nothing on display in this clip that dissuades the notion that "Factor" is just transplanting Cowell and Abdul into a clone of the same show they left. And new judges Nicole Scherzinger and Antonio "LA" Reid" barely register. The Pepsi can on their table seems more expressive than any of the four of them.

Does Fox just see "Factor" as something to tide over "Idol" fans until January? If this clip is truly representative of what's to come, there's not much reason to be excited for Cowell's return in September.

TNT has put out a "Dallas" trailer only a few days since giving the pilot a series order. It will be interesting to see how it plays, and the big question is whether fans of the original CBS drama will tune in for the cable version:

The long-delayed sketch comedy show exec produced by Jamie Foxx for Fox, "In the Flow with Affion Crockett," is premiering Aug. 14, and Fox has offered this sneak peek (OK, it's basically a commercial, but you get the idea).

Starring Crockett ("The Boondocks"), the show was first announced last September as an untitled project from former "In Living Color" co-star Foxx — and that project itself replaced an earlier Foxx-in-development pilot that went dead.

Subsequently, a preview and official premiere scheduled for March and June, respectively were also postponed. But now, the Fox(x)es are ready to go.

In other single-X Fox news, the network will air two episodes of National Geographic Channel series "The Indestructibles" at 9 p.m. Saturday. The new series premiered with back-to-back episodes on NGC (a joint venture between National Geographic Ventures and Fox Cable Networks) to an average of 1.1 million overall viewers Sunday.

"The Indestructibles" investigates surviving the unsurvivable.

NBC has officially announced that longtime CBSer Harry Smith will join Brian Williams' new show, as reported on Friday. Smith is set to begin working at NBC News a week from today - which is interesting, because NBC hasn't set a start date (or even a title) for the new program. The show has two exec producers - Rome Hartman and David Corvo - and will presumably be adding more staff in the near future. Bob Greenblatt has expressed serious interest in finding a place in the schedule for the hourlong newsmagazine, and NBC has a lot of brand new product set for the fall.

“A veteran in the industry and highly regarded journalist, we’re honored to have Harry on board as one of the correspondents of the new primetime newsmagazine show," said NBC News topper Steve Capus. “His vast experience, covering everything from interviews with world leaders to wars and natural disasters, makes him a perfect fit for this new broadcast. Plus, Harry also brings a well earned reputation for being a great colleague and co-worker - something we truly value at NBC News.”

The guys behind Adult Swim sensation "Robot Chicken" are launching another show on the Internet. Seth Green and Matthew Senreich are collaborating this time out with Joe Kavanagh (formerly of Mattel) on "Stoopid Monkey," a series that mixes live action and stop-motion animation. It's set to bow July 15 on their YouTube channel. Green will also do a voice on the program (but still continue as the voice of Chris Griffin on "Family Guy"). If "Stoopid" sounds familiar, that's also the name of Senreich and Green's production company, which is set to release the DVD for "Robot Chicken: Star Wars Episode III."

AMC will rerun all four seasons of "Mad Men," three hours every Sunday morning beginning July 31.

Season five of the series is expected to premiere in March.