It's to be expected there would be an outpouring of sympathy for Ann Curry given her tearful goodbye Thursday on "The Today Show." Another less obvious outcome of her exit: open hostility via social media for Matt Lauer.

Perhaps it was the on-air departure that many observers felt displayed an awkwardness between Curry and Lauer, whose attempt to land a goodbye kiss didn't quite connect with her cheek. Or maybe it was press reports preceding the televised farewell suggesting Lauer agitated for Curry's ouster in a bid to help "Today" fight off a ratings challenge from rival "Good Morning America."

Either way, a simple Twitter search for Matt Lauer or his Twitter handle, @mlauer, reveals hundreds of tweets--with few exceptions--knocking the anchor with accusations of betraying Curry. 

"Could've been handled so much better...." tweeted @RealPegster. "I really lost all respect for @mlauer...."

And that's just one of the tame ones. "Judas" was a familiar refrain in some of the anti-Lauer tweets, as was a certain pejorative that starts with a "d" but has no business being repeated in a family newspaper website. The tweets also dredged up a flurry of unsubstantiated tabloid reports disparaging the state of Lauer's marriage, which probably doesn't need much help spreading virally in the first place.

Just some temporary venting from a small portion of the audience who may not even remember Curry by next week? Maybe. Or perhaps the beginning of a groundswell being whipped up the way only social media can, delivering the kind of reputation-altering controversy that may come back to haunt Lauer and NBC, which recently re-signed him to a lucrative long-term deal to stay on "Today." The Peacock has been here before, having seen both the company and Jay Leno take a serious beating on Twitter during another tempestuous sign-off at the network involving Conan O'Brien.

Which isn't to say Lauer didn't have some supporters too, though they were far outnumbered by the detractors. 

"Class act from @anncurry this morning. And thanks to @MLauer for being a supportive co-host and friend. Brava," tweeted @RosieBoo65.

NBC is going to have to be careful how the optics play out on air, especially with the eventual crowning of expected replacement Savannah Guthrie and future appearances by Curry on "Today."

It was an on-air goodbye long on emotion but short on explanation (see video above). As widely anticipated, Ann Curry bid adieu to the "Today" program she called a family as she fought back tears. But the five-minute farewell left a mystery as to why she was stepping aside for a new role at NBC News--lackluster chemistry with Matt Lauer was blamed for the franchise's newfound ratings vulnerability--or who was to replace her--Savannah Guthrie is reportedly close to a deal for the co-anchor role.

It was back on March 11, 1997 that Curry first joined the program, as seen below (link).

Here she is celebrating her 10th year on 'Today' (link)

On June 9, 2011, Curry was bumped up to co-anchor. Try not to squirm as Lauer hails the "comfortable fit" she brings to the program (link)

And finally, that promotion also occasioned this Curry career retrospective (link, no embed available).

If you're one of this nation’s more than 100 million cable, satellite and telco customers (and get CNBC and MSNBC as part of your service), here's how you can get approved to watch NBC's 3,500 hours of live streaming Olympics coverage this summer:

1. Go to NBCOlympics.com/LiveExtra.

2. Click the “Click Here & Get Ready” button.

3. Select your cable, satellite or telco provider.

4. Enter the username and password that corresponds with your account.

You'll need to do this for each device you intend to use for Olympics viewing.

Imagine if FX had followed up on shows like "Sons of Anarchy" and "American Horror Story" with..."Dallas." 

That's something akin to the shock coming to viewers who love the network for shows like "Louie" and "Archer" when they encounter the new Charlie Sheen vehicle "Anger Management." As many critics including Variety's Brian Lowry have noted, whether you like the series or not, "Anger" is inarguably nothing like all the edgy, innovative fare that came before it on FX.

True to the network's tagline, "There Is No Box," FX has conditioned its audience to expect programming that defies the conventions of the medium. Going back to "The Shield" and "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," each and every FX original scripted series screamed: Broadcast TV wouldn't dare try this.

There was more to admire at FX than its consistency; there was artistic integrity.

Which makes "Anger" such a departure, one hard to interpret it as anything different than a move to capitalize on the Sheen's notoriety or the built-in audience he brings over from "Two and a Half Men."

But is there more to "Anger" than just a cynical ratings ploy? A business like FX doesn't get to where it is by letting "Anger" slip through as a casual aberration. Certainly not on cable, where making sure programming adheres to the network brand is religion. 

Surely there's a hidden variable in FX's calculation here. Let's peruse some possibilities.

Consider that FX may be using "Anger" to make a quiet brand pivot, stretching the limits of what constitutes a series on its air. 

Now cable channels adjust their identities all the time, but it's tough to recall an example of one that put a series on its air without deliberately signaling a change in direction. This kind of repositioning is typically accompanied by a marketing campaign explaining and celebrating the shift. 

So why the sneak? Maybe because in pursuing life outside "the box," FX has found itself boxed into an unanticipated corner: series as creatively adventurous may not deliver the size of audience that broader fare has delivered to higher rated competing general entertainment networks like TNT and USA. Critical darlings rarely enjoy widespread appeal. 

But to simply shout, 'Hey, we at FX are selling out and going broad!" would run contrary to the air of artistic integrity the network has cultivated to date. So FX is forced to tiptoe into that direction, marketing a series that really isn't in the spirit of its previous work as if it is, to keep up appearances. 

Yes, some portion of the FX audience who have come to appreciate its distinctive style are going to be confused, but alienated? Perhaps FX feels it has built up enough capital with them to take a flyer on an outlier. Or maybe the network feels it has reached a volume of original programming over its history that even a sharp departure from that history will still be outweighed by the collective tonnage of its past work.

But you could just as easily argue that history is easily outweighed by your most current hit, and "Anger" has the potential to be the highest rated series FX has ever had. Once that happens, a hit can hijack your brand, defining it to the exception of all else.

If that's the case,  FX must be betting the number of new viewers to the network that Sheen will bring will outnumber the number of existing viewers who will be alienated. 

In doing nothing to communicate the disconnect between brand and "Anger," perhaps FX has made the following hedge: If "Anger" somehow failed and ended after 10 episodes (here's more on "Anger's" 10/90 deal), declaring a new network identity at this juncture would make no sense because there would be nothing else on the air to reinforce this broader brand image. FX may even conclude that the brand identity that preceded "Anger" precluded its success, like a body rejecting a mismatched organ donation.

But in the likelier event "Anger" does well and 90 more episodes follow, then FX could be more comfortable adopting a different branding tack. A few more shows like "Anger" would join the schedule in time, the "box" would be no more and years from now a brief moment of brand whiplash would be forgotten.

Or maybe for all of cable's rigidity toward branding and the accepted wisdom of making sure every series is an outgrowth of some marketed identity, the reality of branding is more elastic. Maybe the innovative programming of the past can sit aside the new pablum without pablum tainting the the rest of the network.

Let's not forget that all of FX's scripted original programming efforts to date are confined to the 10 p.m. time period. No matter how much you invest in marketing and programming for that hour, could it really singlehandedly set a network's identity with more power than what's on FX the other 23 hours of the day? 

Those hours are filled with an expensive collection of off-net movies and series, most notably "Two and a Half Men," which just happen to be on at 7 p.m., the last hour before primetime begins. But note that "Anger" is on at 9 p.m., and therein lies what may be really going on here. 

Instead of a brand pivot, "Anger" is something of a brand bridge. It's quite possible that the audience coming to FX to enjoy off-brand sitcoms and blockbusters for most of the day is an entirely different audience than the one looking for on-brand edginess at 10 p.m. Wouldn't it be swell to have a property that could better establish some "flow," to borrow the network programmer's slang of choice, that more effectively moves viewers from one daypart to another? 

And what better property to transition audience from one daypart to the other than to take the star of the show on at 7 p.m. and put him in a new show at 9 p.m., make it sitcom-y enough to grab sitcom fans from the previous hours but just edgy enough to prepare viewer palates for 10 p.m. Carpet-bomb the earlier daypart with "Anger" ads, and voila! You have "flow."

It's really a variation on a strategy Turner networks have been employing for years, taking the stars of the hit series in its syndication rotation and casting them in new originals. But Turner doesn't have the kind of tonal schizophrenia between dayparts that FX may be suffering.

Whatever the case, let's hope the network's sense of its own identity finds itself in time on firmer footing than its current shaky ground.

In the opening episode of HBO's "The Newsroom," Will McAvoy (Jeff Daniels) rants about why America isn't the greatest country in the world anymore and what made it so great decades ago. While a good amount of what he says might be on target, he completely ignored the problems of the country in years past, and some of his lines had holes big enough to drive a network news show through.  Here are the three biggest whoppers:

“If liberals are so fucking smart, how come they lose so goddamned always.”

“It sure used to be (the greatest country). … We never beat our chests.”

“We didn’t scare so easy.”

By the way, HBO is screening the full first episode of "The Newsroom" free to non-subscribers.

Matt Lauer must be feeling his oats these days. Fresh off his new $25 million-per-year contract, he is getting his reported wish of dumping co-anchor Ann Curry in order to help the "Today" franchise fend off a challenge from rival "Good Morning America."

Were it only so simple.

Sure, in the rarefied circles of media insiders, Lauer may have vaulted a few spots on the requisite power lists. But if he and NBC aren't careful, he stands to lose as this tricky transition plays out on the bigger, more treacherous stage of public opinion.

Put yourself in the sensible shoes of the soccer moms who are the foundation of the "Today" fan base, and Curry's departure could come off in a way that isn't too flattering for Lauer. The broad strokes of the media coverage to date appears as: 'Today' is in trouble, Curry is the weak link, and Lauer believes she needs to go.

And that narrative will only get worse on TV where Lauer risks looking caddish as he tosses aside his on-air partner and trades her in for what will probably be a younger, more conventionally beautiful-looking woman, if the reports of the ascendance of Savannah Guthrie and Natalie Morales are to be believed.

Oh, the soccer moms are going to just looove that. 

On an almost primal level, the Lauer-Curry pairing feels uncomfortably close to a bad Lifetime movie. She devoted 15 years of her life to "Today" only to get kicked to the curb to make room for another female. And whether you like Curry or not, viewers have to be feeling for her given the beating she is taking in the press.

You could argue that Lauer is a non-factor in all this because when it comes down to it, she was falling out of favor with an audience who by and large may want to see her go. It certainly can't be as simple as Lauer wanted her out, so now she's out. His belief in the necessity of her departure is no doubt backed by audience research suggesting she was not a good fit opposite him on "Today."

While that's all well and good, Curry couldn't have gotten this far for so long without winning over some significant minority of women who don't mind her robotic mannerisms or bad chemistry with Lauer. And isn't a little odd that for all the years she played a supporting role on "Today" there were no warning signs that she lacked the goods for the top job?

Part of the problem here is that Lauer and NBC have already made an irreversible mistake. When The New York Times first reported the prospect of Curry departing, they would have been wiser to do everything possible to present to reporter Brian Stelter that Lauer not as an agitator for change but a passive observer or even better, someone who actually fought for her to stay because he's that swell a guy.

Audience research showing Curry was falling out of favor should have been leaked, shifting responsibility away from Lauer and more firmly toward the science of research. "We're just doing the bidding of our audience," should have been the subtext of the anonymous quote given to NYT.

Instead, now we have Lauer looking like a $25 million diva who gets what he wants because he has that power. And when that sentiment filters down to the "Today" audience, it's not a good thing.

There will be an opportunity for Lauer to redeem his reputation when the time comes for Lauer to bid his on-air goodbye to Curry. As the consummate pro of either exuding goodwill or faking sincerity, Lauer is going to have to yank tears out of his ducts even if he hates the woman with every cell in his body. 

But even if cries a river, how the circumstances for her departure is going to be explained on the air is absolutely crucial. That's why it's essential that NBC figure out an alternative role for her within the organization that doesn't feel like a demotion. The network would also look bad because given Curry's supposed preference for serious journalism, the network doesn't want to be seen turning away someone capable of substantive reporting.

Whether she stays or goes is largely up to her new representative, Robert Barnett. The big question is whether he's having conversations with other networks about Curry carrying on elsewhere. At the end of the day, Barnett is going to weigh whatever NBC's consolation-prize deal is against outside offers and make a decision.

For Lauer's sake, he might best hope she sticks around.

'Newsroom' creator/writer Aaron Sorkin at Wednesday's premiere.

As TV critics pick apart the new HBO drama series "Newsroom" (here's the Variety review), there's no shortage of shortcomings being cited. But for me it came down to its parallels to another riveting drama about the news business currently playing out at Time Warner. 

CNN finds itself at a fascinating, perhaps tragic moment in its existence. Primetime ratings dipped to record lows in April, far below arch rivals Fox News Channel and MSNBC. Those woes have triggered publicly voiced disappointment from Turner Broadcasting CEO Philip Kent and speculation that CNN chief Ken Jautz could find himself replaced.

Maybe the network should replace the news with "Newsroom," which follows Will McAvoy a cable-news anchor and self-described "ratings whore" played by Jeff Daniels, as he attempts to take his primetime program in a new direction. He's prodded along by Charlie Skinner (Sam Waterston), the news-division chief who orchestrates the reawakening of McAvoy's conscience by hiring MacKenzie McHale (Emily Mortimer) to be his producer and moral muse.

It's a nifty dynamic for drama, especially considering McHale also happens to be McAvoy's ex-girlfriend. But let's get real. In this day and age, would CNN or any news operation have the luxury of believing that getting ratings is nice and all, but restoring integrity is a higher priority? 

The notion that a news-division chief would decide to overhaul an otherwise successful primetime cable news program in the spirit of restoring good ol' fashioned journalism while disregarding the ratings is so divorced from what actually happens in the media business that "Newsroom" loses an authenticity it otherwise strives to achieve.

The more realistic dilemma to depict is essentially a reversal of the "Newsroom" equation: Instead of brushing aside ratings concerns to pursue integrity, isn't journalists compromising integrity to chase ratings a more common occurrence?

That's not meant to be an indictment of anyone working in TV news today, just an acknowledgement of the irreconcilable dual goals of serving both the public interest and stockholders in the company that employs them. As long as eyeballs are being converted into advertising dollars, news programs are under immense pressure to amass an audience using methods they wouldn't bother with were they not-for-profit enterprises.

CNN has resisted those same pressures by not pandering to partisan interests the way Fox and MSNBC have done for conservatives and liberals, respectively, which only serves to keep an already polarized country further apart.

But perhaps taking that high road has taken too high a toll at CNN, which finds itself at a crossroads. Can its business recover as long as it sticks to the traditional principles of objectivity? Is it time for CNN to change its ways and try a programming approach that indulges in sensationalism or partisanship--though what would the latter even look like given the country's political parties already have news networks to call their own?

If Sorkin ran CNN, my guess is he'd argue that as long as the news was reported with passion and a distinct point of view, everything would be just ducky. As long as modern-day Murrows deliver the news, viewers would lap up un-sexy subjects from overseas wars to financial reform.

That's the rather pat piety at the foundation of Sorkin's fantasy of What News Should Be, at least if the first four episodes of "Newsroom" are any indication.

But that means the show is ignoring the examination of what could be an uglier truth: TV news has become the watered-down pap it largely is today not because the broadcasters unilaterally dumbed it down, but because viewers by and large don't flock to quality coverage the way Sorkin himself does.

That's a reality that could be staring CNN in the face right now. And that's what makes the way Sorkin romanticizes audience receptivity to news a bit jarring if you've followed CNN's travails over the past decade. Like Will McAvoy and Charlie Skinner, the network tried to do the right thing. But it didn't do CNN any good.

There's an inevitable comparison to be made between the fictional cable news network in "Newsroom" and the real one owned by Time Warner. And that's just the problem: There's such a fundamental disconnect between the two given where CNN is at right now that "Newsroom" suffers by comparison.

Evidence of the Twitter-ization of television is everywhere you look these days, from customized hashtags in the corner of the screen during a TV show ("Fringe") to voting on episodic singing contests via social media ("The X Factor"). But the MTV series "Made" is taking the trend to a whole new level.

The long-running unscripted series opened up its 12th season on Monday with a curious name change. The series is now called "Made #DreamBigger." It's the first instance of a TV program actually changing its name to incorporate a hashtag, which even shows up in the cable/satellite electronic program guides.

The rationale is obvious enough: The hope is viewers will tweet about the series with the hashtag, which could help spread the word on Twitter enough to invite more viewers to sample "Made." But the notion that a network would go so far as to change the name of a show to extend a strategy typically reserved to a small on-air bug in the lower right corner--that really tells you something about how the TV industry views the power of Twitter.

An MTV spokeswoman confirmed that the name change is intended to increase engagement of viewers on Twitter but also made clear the title changes reflects a creative change to this season, which focuses on older subjects exploring more adult life choices (here's a press release announcing the new season).

That said, there's little evidence, at least at this early stage, that incorporating a hashtag in the title is whipping up some kind of grass-roots phenomenon for "Made." Searching on Twitter for #dreambigger reveals there's been maybe a few dozen mentions of the hashtag as it relates to "Made." While the phrase they've chosen to hashtag speaks to the aspirational nature of the show, MTV may have been courting confusion by picking a phrase that also happens to be the name of an upcoming show on Ashton Kutcher's new YouTube channel, Thrash Lab. Many mentions of #dreambigger on Twitter relate to Kutcher's show. (Small world: Kutcher is currently in business with MTV given the recent resuscitation of his series "Punk'd.")

Another strategic quibble: If you're going to change the name of your show on TV to court the Twitter crowd, wouldn't it also make sense to change the name of the show's Twitter account, which remains @MTVsMade.

And maybe the "Made" hashtag would have been better off with something more direct, like #watchmadepleasepleaseplease?

Check out the trailer for the new season of "Made" below.

If you can't wait for "Saturday Night Live" to return in the fall, Lorne Michaels has given some of its cast members and writers a summer home.

The "SNL" executive producer's production company, Broadway Video, quietly launched a YouTube channel last week with episodic comedic shorts that have featured Bill Hader ( "The Front Desk"), Abby Elliott ("The Assistant") and Kenan Thompson ("Cool Kids' Table"), and there's more of their colleagues on the way if the highlight reel above is any indication.

Broadway Video and NBC declined to comment on what exactly the Above Average Network is because it is currently in beta, with an official launch expected later this summer.

It's tempting to assume given the timing of the AAN launch so closely on the heels of the departure of Andy Samberg that "SNL" might be plotting something that could take the place of his "Digital Shorts" segments. It might be smart for "SNL" to cross-pollinate with a digital-native franchise considering the Internet has been not only a key driver of the series' revitalization in recent years by re-circulating sketches for viral consumption online but a home for sketches that get cut from the broadcast. Hell, Samberg's "Lazy Sunday" sketch has been credited for helping put YouTube on the map.

But sources explained AAN is an entirely separate venture from "SNL" and not a breeding ground for ideas or talent that could end up on the late-night series. "Digital Shorts" could conceivably continue without Samberg as well.

That said, it's not like AAN is somehow being setting up to compete with "SNL," either. Some of the segments are even being cross-promoted on NBC.com because the network is entitled to exhibit anything with the "SNL" talent per NBC's contractual agreements with the show's cast members.

Also on the way is a parody of USA Network dramas called "Hooker Lawyer," which shouldn't take much imagination to understand its premise, and "Puppet High," which as you might expect, features puppets in high school. Michaels' calls in talent from other shows produced by Broadway Video as well, including John Lutz from "30 Rock," who appears in "Front Desk." So far AAN segments have the kind of absurdist tone of the skits "SNL" usually puts on after 12:30 a.m. when they aren't interested in getting a third performance out of their musical guest.

Broadway Video has dabbled online before. Hader starred in a terrific series of shorts called "The Line" in 2008. More recently, "SNL" writer Mike O'Brien hosted his own talk show featuring celebrity guests chatting with him inside a closet called "7 Minutes in Heaven."

Lorne-ologists might recall that Above Average was the name of the production company he started in the late 1970s to launch extra-curricular programs like Beatles parody "The Rutles." The title of the network could offer some hint that Michaels knows from his own experience how difficult it can be to break new ground in comedy outside "SNL." When he left the series he founded for a five-year spell beginning in 1980, he tried to launch another NBC sketch program, "The New Show," that lasted only nine episodes.

For all the hype that surrounds the launch of nearly everything at the intersection of media and technology, it's rare to hear a post-mortem that looks back in the cold, hard light of reality. Which is why it was such a treat to watch (via livestream) Albert Cheng, executive VP of digital media and chief product officer at Disney-ABC Television Group, speak Wednesday at the Banff World Media Festival.

Since his division has been at the leading edge of many of the trends transforming the digital video world, his remarks offered a welcome retrospective on everything from being TV's first entry on Apple's iTunes to the first companion app synchronizing content and TV, for ABC's "Grey's Anatomy" (which was preceded by a trial for short-lived 2010 series "My Generation").

The latter example proved particularly interesting considering that the social-TV craze that followed the companion app might want to heed some of the reservations Cheng expressed about the space, which he characterized as currently being in a "frothy experimental stage." Though he's bullish on the future of this technology, he said there's a currently a limited audience.

"From the data we have seen so far, we are addressing a small percentage of people who are sort of, you know, reaching out for these sort of things," he said. "It is not exactly a widely adopted behavior."

In lieu of a truly mass audience, the real appeal of second screen is attracting marketers to an opportunity to extend their buys beyond the 30-second spot.

Speaking particularly of the "Anatomy" app, Cheng said ABC learned that scripted programming doesn't lend itself as well to companion apps as live events like the Oscars.

"Overall when you asked them whether it added to or enhanced the overhaul experience, in part, yeah, kind of neutral on that," he said. "In some cases it distracted them from watching the show. Audio cues come up during a major scene, you look down and you realize that you missed a key piece of (dialogue)."

Part of the problem also is on the cost side. ABC wanted the writers of "Anatomy" to be involved in supplying the extra content that flowed through the app, but the expense doesn't justify the return, particularly when you factor in the cost of scaling up to more than one show.

"For scripted, I would say we still have more work to do," said Cheng. "I don't think we cracked the code on that. There may be a model out there that will work, maybe during commercials. Definitely not synchronous while you are watching the show."

Cheng believes mobile devices like the iPad represent a unique opportunity for traditional media companies like ABC to recapture the mind share they lost in the PC era, first to portals like Yahoo and then social networks like Facebook. Given these categories haven't extended their dominance (at least yet) on tablets, where content companies' expertise in video and advertising can give them an edge in re-establish their primacy in the media ecosystem.

I do think media companies have an opportunity to really drive a lot of the lion share of that in the mobile space," he said. "I would argue for the broadcaster, for the cable network, for the content company, this is a place where we know. We have always been in the business of programming, content -- it is in our DNA. In order to capture that market, let's make sure that we are deploying technology."

But for all the importance of tablets to Cheng, don't look for ABC anytime on Android-powered devices--even though they might outnumber iOs-centric wireless screens. Fragmentation across Google's myriad versions of its operating system is something he's currently not prepared to service.

"There will be some devices left out because we can't get to them," he said. "That will be a disadvantage, I think, for Android users down the line. Google can figure out how to wrangle some standards in place that we can actually develop content on."

Wireless devices represent an opportunity to rethink the traditional mode of video delivery--namely, that post-dinner period of relaxation known as "primetime"-- and reinvent it for programming all together new viewing opportunities that are far afield from conventional TV.

"What digital has done has created a lot more variety of use cases," he said. "If we can figure out that, then we actually have a huge growth of opportunity before us."

By Cynthia Littleton 

Appropriately enough for a season finale the overriding theme of “Mad Men” seemed to moving on — which is often something easier said than done.

I was expecting more fireworks overall, based on the show’s track record during its last two season closers. But I was not disappointed in “The Phantom,” written by Jonathan Igla and Matthew Weiner and directed by Weiner.

For the second season in a row, the “Mad Men” world goes out on a will-he-or-won’t-he cliffhanger. In 2010 the question was whether Don Draper would go through with his impetuous plan to marry Megan. This time around, we are left to wonder whether he’ll return to his old philandering ways.

After thinking about it for all of 15 minutes, I believe the answer is no. I think Don Draper has done a lot of maturing through his marriage to Megan and through the course of this season. The provocative question “Are you alone” doesn’t mean what it once did to Don. I think that was the point of the storyline of Don having the horrible toothache. After living with the pain, he finally broke down and went to the dentist to have it pulled, in the nick of time. (Out goes the tooth, out go the hallucinations about his dead brother Adam.)

The scene I most enjoyed was the meeting of Peggy and Don in the theater. It was another classic use of a candid conversation with Peggy to allow Don to process something – this time how to move forward on the issue of Megan’s career. (And we saw just how much Megan wants to jumpstart her thespian career by her willingness to screw over her actress friend by muscling in on her effort to land the role in the shoe commercial.)

And it allowed for a bit of closure between Peggy and Don at the same time planting the seeds that maybe she could be back in the Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce (wonder if they’ll change the name?) picture one day. Certainly, the agency misses her and her feminine touch.

So close.

The Stanley Cup and all its silver glory was in the house Wednesday, at Staples Center ready to get a nice post-game spin around the rink. Alas, the Los Angeles Kings couldn’t close the deal, losing 3-1 to the New Jersey Devils and will head back east for game five Saturday night.

For those who were preoccupied and didn’t know who won and turned on the 6 o'clock edition of ESPN’s "SportsCenter" this morning to find out, they wouldn’t have known for a long time either.

It wasn’t until about 35 minutes past the hour, and at least 15-20 items on its on-screen ticker, before ESPN offered a segment on the game. That’s unacceptable.

The Worldwide Leader in Sports either has terrible editorial judgment or is spiteful in that it didn’t win the NHL rights that were captured by NBC.

Granted, I’m not going to think for a nanosecond that hockey is more popular than the NBA, but the cabler couldn’t have at least done a short piece on the game early in the telecast — maybe somewhere in-between an analysis on a problematic hangnail for a San Antonio Spurs player or what LeBron James might be having for lunch to prepare him for Game 6?

And, to make matters worse, even if you are in the opinion that a slew of basketball stories should be reported before one hockey mention, ESPN does a Tim Tebow report about his coming to the New York Jets and how that will affect quarterback Mark Sanchez.

It’s June, people! Maybe the calendar is different in Bristol, Conn., than the rest of the country, but to offer another Tebow story, when 1,724 of them have been done before, prior to a Stanley Cup Finals story is nonsensical.

Last I checked, the teams in the finals are in Los Angeles and the New York metropolitan area, so it’s not exactly Phoenix vs. Tampa Bay. We’re actually fairly big markets, in case anyone is looking it up.

Whether ESPN is burying hockey because they lost on the contract to NBC is purely speculative, and there is an absolute right for them to concentrate on sports in which they have live rights deals, but let’s hope they are not putting business decisions in light of the public good. And that public does actually know what a hockey puck is.

While ranting, I’m also not particularly happy with NBC either. Again, a business deal got in the way of common sense when local Peacock L.A. station KNBC couldn’t air the Kings game Monday or last night. Instead, the game was shown on cabler NBC Sports Network. Longtime KNBC sports anchor Fred Roggin said he worked for days to try and shift the game, but to no avail.

Two problems here: If you’re NBC and the NHL — a collaboration that is in the first stages of a 10-year-deal — and trying to build your sport, airing it on NBC Sports Network in a town that, for the first time in ages, wanted to watch hockey in masse isn’t a smart idea. Yes, pre-existing advertising and carriage deals were made, but those could have been worked out and exceptions made.

I can’t tell you how many casual hockey fans, who rarely go to the games or watch them, said to me over the last few days: "I wanted to watch the Kings game but couldn’t find it. Where is NBC Sports Network?"

But, if neither party would budge and move to the game over to KNBC, how could the NHL or NBC or even the cable carriers and satcasters not taken out an ad in the Los Angeles Times or other publications and online and alerting fans what channel the game is on? For example, no viewer is going to casually scroll to channel 603 on DirecTV to find the game.

So to those long-suffering Kings fans, and even those who are finding room on the bandwagon, it looks like we’re in this on our own.

Via Funny or Die.

At The Vote, "Mad Men" actor Jared Harris reflects on Lane Price and "Mad Men."

Leave it to Ben Stiller to school the Internet on creating original programming for digital platforms. He's one of the executive producers of "Burning Love," the new Yahoo series launching Monday that is that rarest of things: an online-only production worth telling people to watch.

"Burning" is a note-for-note pitch-perfect satire of the ABC dating show "The Bachelor" that had me howling several times in each of the three episodes available on Yahoo at launch (new episodes roll out every Monday and Thursday through July).

Unfortunately for digital-content ventures, it is incredibly difficult to be funny beyond a one-off viral sensation the likes of which Funny Or Die knows how to produce. So when someone comes along and clears that bar, it's noteworthy.

The reason "Burning" can do this is Yahoo paid to put real talent on both sides of the camera. The ugly truth of why digital original programming is typically lackluster is that it's mostly the domain of folks who don't have the experience of creatives who already proved their mettle in film and TV. It's no coincidence that "Burning" has solid Hollywood auspices like Stiller, star/director Ken Marino, and Paramount Pictures.

There's also an insane amount of talent on screen including Malin Akerman, Michael Ian Black, Kristen Bell, Ken Jeong and Adam Scott--just to name a few (keep an ear on the voice coming from the woman inside the panda outfit). When you put together that kind of roster and production values, it screams to the viewer: 'This is something you have to watch.' Not like most original programming online, which looks like it was slapped together with scotch tape, bubble gum and Ileana Douglas.

Sure, the "Bachelor" is a pretty moldy target for humor but "Burning" does so many other things right that it needs to be shouted about from a mountaintop (or a Variety blog behind a paywall).

Don was wrong. About a third of the way into “Commissions and Fees,” Don tells Lane that he’ll get over getting quietly sacked from Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce over the “13-day loan” he finagled for himself.

“The next thing will be better because it always is,” Don tells Lane, distraught after realizing that Don isn’t going to change his mind about forcing his resignation. “I’ve started over a lot, Lane. This is the worst part.”

For Lane, the worst was just around the corner. Even suicide didn’t come easy to him, in a devilishly comic twist on the Jaguar storyline (unreliable to the end!) that I’m sure will cause some gnashing of teeth at Jag parent company Tata Motors on Monday. Don was right when it came to speaking about his own experience, but he was wrong for Lane. The contrast only reinforced what a survivor Don is, as was underscored later in the episode by his “think big” challenge to Roger.

It was no accident that there were two references to Easter in this episode — the resurrection. We’re seeing it in progress with Joan, who’s exerting herself as a partner even in the face of unavoidably awkward moments. And we’re seeing it big-time in Don as his drive to win revs up (undoubtedly spurred on by the blow of losing Peggy to a competitor). The Jaguar win only whets his appetite. It’s just as he tells the major domo of Dow Chemical (oh how I love Ray Wise in anything), “Happiness is just a moment before you want more happiness.” Don’s convincing in his three-minute pitch because he means what he says.

Although it became easy to see Lane’s suicide coming in this episode, they way it was handled, plus the slam-bang action of the other storylines, made this one hell of a penultimate episode. There was a lot that could have gone wrong, or hokey, or ooey gooey in this episode but it worked because it was the “Mad Men” troupe at its best, from the cast to writers Andre and Maria Jacquemetton to helmer Christopher Manley.

NEW YORK (AP) — Richard Dawson, the wisecracking British entertainer who was among the schemers in the 1960s sitcom "Hogan's Heroes" and a decade later began kissing thousands of female contestants as host of the game show "Family Feud" has died. He was 79.

Dawson, also known to TV fans as the Cockney POW Cpl. Peter Newkirk on "Hogan's Heroes," died Saturday night from complications related to esophageal cancer at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, his son Gary said.

The game show, which initially ran from 1976 to 1985, pitted families who tried to guess the most popular answers to poll questions such as "What do people give up when they go on a diet?"

Dawson won a daytime Emmy Award in 1978 as best game show host. Tom Shales of The Washington Post called him "the fastest, brightest and most beguilingly caustic interlocutor since the late great Groucho bantered and parried on 'You Be Your Life.'" The show was so popular it was released as both daytime and syndicated evening versions.

He was known for kissing each woman contestant, and at the time the show bowed out in 1985, executive producer Howard Felsher estimated that Dawson had kissed "somewhere in the vicinity of 20,000."

"I kissed them for luck and love, that's all," Dawson said at the time.

It was on "Feud" that Dawson met contestant Gretchen Johnson, who appeared on the show teamed with members of her family. After dating for a decade, she and Dawson wed in 1991. They had a daughter, Shannon.

Dawson reprised his game show character in a much darker mood in the 1987 Arnold Schwarzenegger film "The Running Man," playing the host of a deadly TV show set in a totalitarian future, where convicts try to escape as their executioners stalk them. "Saturday Night Live" mocked him in the 1970s, with Bill Murray portraying him as leering and nasty, even slapping one contestant (John Belushi) for getting too fresh.

The British-born actor already had gained fame as the fast-talking Newkirk in "Hogan's Heroes," the CBS comedy that starred Bob Crane and mined laughs from a Nazi POW camp whose prisoners hoodwink their captors and run the place themselves.

Despite its unlikely premise, the show made the ratings top 10 in its first season, 1965-66, and ran until 1971.

"We ran six years," Dawson once quipped, "a year longer than Hitler."

Both "Hogan's Heroes" and "Family Feud" have had a second life in recent years, the former on DVD reissues and the latter on GSN, formerly known as the Game Show Network.

On Dawson's last "Family Feud" in 1985, the studio audience honored him with a standing ovation, and he responded: "Please sit down. I have to do at least 30 minutes of fun and laughter and you make me want to cry."

"I've had the most incredible luck in my career," he told viewers.

"I never dreamed I would have a job in which so many people could touch me and I could touch them," he said. That triggered an unexpected laugh.

Producers brought out "The New Family Feud," starring comedian Ray Combs, in 1988. Six years later, Dawson replaced Combs at the helm, but that lasted only one season. Steve Harvey is the current host.

Dawson was born Colin Lionel Emm in 1932 in Gosport, England. When he was 14 he joined the Merchant Marines, serving three years.

He first got into show business as a stand-up comedian, playing clubs in London's West End including the legendary Stork Room. It was there, in the late 1950s, he met blond bombshellDiana Dors, the film star who became known as Britain's answer to Marilyn Monroe. They married in 1959. The couple divorced in the late 1960s.

Dawson landed roles in TV comedy and variety shows in the early 1960s, including "The Steve Allen Show" and "The Dick Van Dyke Show." Then his performance as a military prisoner in the 1965 film "King Rat" led to his being cast in "Hogan's Heroes," which truly made him a star to American audiences.

He became a frequent celebrity contestant on game shows, which led to hosting jobs on both daytime and prime-time versions of "The Match Game."

While still hosting "The Match Game," he began on "Family Feud," where his popularity grew to such levels that he was mentioned as a frontrunner to win the "Tonight Show" host chair to succeed Johnny Carson, who at the time was considering retirement. Though Carson stayed put, Dawson appeared as a guest host.

Dawson is survived by his widow, Gretchen, their daughter Shannon, two sons, Mark and Gary, from his first marriage, and four grandchildren.

Andy Samberg is following Kristen Wiig out the door at "Saturday Night Live," the comedian confirmed to The New York Times on Friday. And while Wiig seems to have a bright future at least in the short term on the film side, the road ahead for Samberg is much less certain.

It's too bad that Samberg didn't get the kind of send-off that Wiig did in the "SNL" season finale. Like Wiig, the sheer longevity of his run on the show--seven years--merited on-air acknowledgment. We can only presume it wasn't any kind of personal slight and more of a reflection of the uncertainty over his fate as terms of his contract hadn't yet been finalized.

It's easy to lose sight of the relative importance of any individual performer on "SNL" given the turnover there, but his legacy can't be understated. Samberg carved out for himself something of a shadow world unto himself within the "SNL" umbrella. His "Digital Short" segment was a fixture of nearly every episode from the inaugural "Lazy Sunday" skit that practically put YouTube on the map to a side career in the music industry he paved via hilarious music videos cranked out through his Lonely Island troupe.

He brought a zany aesthetic all his own that stood both apart and together within "SNL," one that can't easily be replicated by just finding the right replacement cast member (though no doubt executive producer Lorne Michaels will try).

Michaels has to be sweating right now as he goes into a crucial season--"SNL" always gets a brighter spotlight during an election year--without two of his biggest talents. That's got to improve the hand of Jason Sudeikis, a third cast veteran said to be on the fence about continuing. His importance in the short term may be even more significant than Wiig or Samberg because he plays Mitt Romney. That should mean they'll keep him around until the end of the year at the very least, but there may be one too many zeroes at the end of his agent's ask to guarantee his return.

Maybe Sudeikis will stay on even longer because "SNL" has a scary track record when it comes to seeing even some of its brightest lights dim once they take leave of the show. Think Dana Carvey or Chris Kattan. Insert shudder here.

As with those gents, it is the distinctiveness of Samberg's talent that complicates his post-"SNL" future. He is a square peg that doesn't fit into the round holes Hollywood has slotted for stars who used the NBC late-night show as a springboard like Will Ferrell and Adam Sandler. It doesn't help matters that his next big test comes later this June opposite Sandler, whose boxoffice record has gone from gold to mold, in "That's My Boy." When you cast a guy like Samberg as a straight man for Sandler to play off of, even in success that's not the right showcase for this comedian.

But Samberg wasn't going to sit around at "SNL" forever. Hopefully he will find some more appropriate film vehicles that fit his style. Otherwise, don't be surprised to find him back on TV. Word to the wise to NBC's rivals: This is the kind of guy you can launch your own sketch show around. Give it a try.

Here's more on the future of SNL sans Wiig

If the first-season finale of the Fox series "Touch" has left a yawning chasm in your life, fear not. Executive producer Tim Kring has launched spinoff of sorts on May 31 in "Daybreak," a digital series done with AT&T as sponsor. Series extends the mythos of the dodecahedron introduced toward the tail end of "Touch's" season to tell a whole new story as action- and tech-heavy as the Fox show (but with none of the cast). "Daybreak" brings in fresh talent like Ryan Eggold ("90210") who might seem like the star, but the true talent on display is the HTC One X handset AT&T is promoting here via some high-end product integration. First episode, all of 9 minutes, is above, with five more to unspool in the coming weeks. There's also all sorts of ancillary content goodies pinned all over the website, which can be found at Daybreak2012.com.