Total Pageviews

At Last, It Seems, an End to \'The Mob Doctor\'

One of the most enduring mysteries on television moved toward a resolution Wednesday: Why hasn't the Fox network canceled its low-rated and low-regarded new drama “The Mob Doctor”?

The answer had proved elusive all autumn, unless it had to do with the network not having anything else to insert into what has become a forbidding time period, Mondays at 9 p.m.

Finally, Fox on Wednesday seemed to be fitting a pair of cement shoes for the mob doctor in question, announcing that when the final completed episode of the series runs on Jan. 7, there will be no more this season.

Still, that was not quite an official rub out; Fox executives would not use the word cancel. So, conceivably, “The Mob Doctor” could be renewed for next season.

It should be noted, however, that this happens to shows with puny ratings about as often as cement shoes prove to be floatation devices.

Bill Carter writes about the television industry. Fol low @wjcarter on Twitter.



Dear Jeff: a Handy List of Contradictory, Surefire Paths to Success at CNN

T. Lynne Pixley for The New York Times

Try to imagine Jeff Zucker's inbox on Wednesday morning.

Along with all the e-mails from friends and former colleagues asking “Is it true?” - namely that he is the choice to run CNN Worldwide, as The New York Times reported Tuesday  - there surely are some suggestions, prescriptions and outright pleas.

That is, the many helpful, unsolicited, “What to do” e-mails. Seemingly, every executive and analyst in the media business has an idea or three for CNN/U.S., the United States outlet of the cable news pioneer, which has lagged in the ratings for several years now. And this year's executive change (Mr. Zucker is in line to replace Jim Walton, who has been in charge for nearly a deca de) has been an excuse to dust them off. It's as if CNN is a blank canvas of sorts - something to project hopes, dreams and business models onto.

These suggestions necessarily are constrained by the profit motive driving the network's parent company, Time Warner, and its commitment to a journalistic tradition of nonpartisanship - despite the lure of the success of Fox and MSNBC. What follows are some of the many visions for CNN that have been bandied about in recent months and surely have made their way to Mr. Zucker:

Cover News Now

Just do the news, and consistently do it well. This is harder than it sounds, but it is a favorite answer, particularly among those who say that CNN's current news product is sloppy and uneven (terrific at some hours, unwatchable at others). When the CUNY journalism professor Jeff Jarvis asked his Google+ followers how they would reinvent CNN last summer, the most-liked comment was this one: “be a domestic version of BBC World News.” The commenter, Alan Bedenko, proposed eschewing “phony entertainment nonsense and semi-informed ‘Situation Room' type garbage” in favor of “straight news.” No gimmicks, no distracting graphics, no holiday gift-giving segments or movie star interviews.

Celebrity Names Network

Mr. Zucker “needs to bring his trademark ‘star power' to the network,” the media industry consultant Adam Armbruster told Reuters.

Might that include some superstar hosts? There are a handful of A-listers that television executives dream about having on their screen, like Bill Clinton, George Clooney and Bono - though it's hard to imagine that any of them would be willing to host a daily show. Mr. Zucker could conceivably recruit stars from other networks, like Katie Couric (he helped start her syndicated talk show earlier this year) or Joe Scarborough (he supported the creation of “Morning Joe” on MSNBC).

Computer Networked News

Despite decades of talk about integrating television and the Internet, television news still mostly exists as a standalone service, and CNN is no exception. Could Mr. Zucker be the executive to change that? Imagine a television channel that simultaneously lives online, with anchors who ask guests questions from Twittering viewers without making a big deal about it; with producers who use webcams to gather opinions from voters, rather than paid pundits; with reporters who talk “up to” viewers, rather than “down to,” because they know that if a viewer is unsure about a certain word or phrase, cnn.com, or, alternatively, Google is just a click away.

Curated Narrative Nonfiction

Many other cable channels have found success with nonfiction stories about people and places - “reality shows,” let's call them, for lack of a better label. CNN has already started to move in this direction, recruiting Anthony Bourdain and Morgan Spurlock to host taped series on weekends. It has also hired an executive to oversee acquisitions from third-party production companies and promoted a CNN Films label for documentaries. If the company concludes that it can't draw an audience with commodity news at night, it might try nonfiction programming during the workweek. “It's going to take someone like Zucker to make that happen,” Andrew Wallenstein of Variety wrote on Wednesday.

Comedy News Network

With the caveat that this won't happen: why not hire Jon Stewart as a consultant? The host of “The Daily Show” takes CNN to task on a regular basis for perceived faults in its programming. Mr. Stewart and his writers would surely have some suggestions for stopping some of the channel's unintentional humor. (His show appears on the sister network CNN International.) Conversely, encourage viewers to laugh at the TV set! CNN could take a shot at a news satire show like Mr. Stewart's, or at least encourage anchors to p oke fun at the stories they cover.

Conversations on the News Network

The radio industry learned years ago that it's not the news that compels listeners to keep listening - it's conversations about the news. While Fox News and MSNBC have reputations for partisan talk, CNN could think of itself as a never-ending nonpartisan live talk show, one that mentions the headlines but mostly chews on the news with its reporters and analysts. This would be a bet, in essence, that taped news packages are a thing of the past.

Checking News Network

The New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen has been sharply critical of CNN for a “he said, she said” style of journalism. His prescription for the channel: “declare jihad on the talking points and make that your identity, along with on-air fact checking.” The marketing slogan could be “the only side we're on is yours.” Mr. Rosen admitted that such a strategy is “politically risky, because there is no guarantee that the results will be balanced, all neat and symmetrical like the panel of pundits.”

Critical Newsgathering Network

Asked what qualities he'd like to see in a new head of CNN, Tom Johnson answered, “A leader who will position CNN as The New York Times of television news - not The New York Post or The National Enquirer.” Mr. Johnson was the head of CNN in the 1990s. He recommended that it “develop the niche as THE investigative/enterprise network - the watchdog for the public!” To accomplish that, he recommended hiring “more Sanjay Guptas in specialty areas, and more Anderson Coopers,” and bringing back Christiane Amanpour full time (she currently splits her time between ABC News and CNN International).

Commercial-Limited News Network:

This one is pretty pie in the sky, given the big profits that CNN makes. But CNN could drastically curtail the number of commercials it shows, thus encouraging viewers to watch for longer stretches of time (right now it suffers in the ratings because viewers tend to watch for just a few minutes). It could, in theory, charge more for the remaining chunks of commercial time. More importantly, it could add more minutes of news each hour. At the same time it could bill itself as a public service or a public utility for the American people - a bid for hearts and minds that might create a loyal following well into the future.

Surely these aren't the only ideas out there for CNN. Please add your thoughts in the comments section.

Brian Stelter writes about television and digital media. Follow @brianstelter on Twitter and facebook.com/brianstelter on Facebook.



In Silicon Valley, Technology Talent Gap Threatens G.O.P. Campaigns

SAN FRANCISCO â€" I live in Brooklyn, where President Obama won 81 percent of the vote earlier this month. It's hard to find anywhere in the country that is more Democratic-leaning.

But San Francisco qualifies. Here, Mr. Obama won 84 percent of the vote, while Mr. Romney took just 13 percent. Even John McCain, who won 14 percent of the vote four years ago, performed slightly better than Mr. Romney did.

And unlike the New York metropolitan area, where Long Island, the borough of Staten Island and many suburbs in New York and New Jersey remain competitive in presidential elections, it is hard to find any significant pockets of support for Republican candidates in the nine counties that make up the San Francisco Bay Area.

Instead, Mr. Obama won the nine counties of the Bay Area by margins ranging from 25 percent (in Napa County) to 71 percent (in the city and county of San Francisco).

Over all, Mr. Obama won the election by 49 percentage points in the Bay Area, more than double his 22-point margin throughout California.

Although San Francisco, Oakland and Berkeley have long been liberal havens, the rest of the region has not always been so. In 1980, Ronald Reagan won the Bay Area vote over all, along with seven of its nine counties. George H.W. Bush won Napa County in 1988.

Republicans have lost every county in the region by a double-digit margin since then. But Democratic margins have become more and more emphatic. Mr. Obama's 49-point margin throughout the Bay Area this year was considerably larger than Al Gore's 34-point win in 2000, for example, or Bill Clinton's 31-point win in 1992.

Even without the Bay Area's v ote, Democrats would still be favored to win California by solid margins. So why does any of this matter?

The reason is that Democrats' strength in the region is hard to separate out from the growth of its core industry - information technology â€" and the advantage that having access to the most talented individuals working in the field could provide to Democratic campaigns.

Companies like Google and Apple do not have their own precincts on Election Day. However, it is possible to make some inferences about just how overwhelmingly Democratic employees at these companies are based on fund-raising data. (The Federal Election Commission requires that donors to presidential campaigns disclose their employer when they make a campaign contribution.)

Among employees who work for Google, Mr. Obama raised about $720,000 in itemized contributions this year, against only $25,000 for Mr. Romney. That means that Mr. Obama took almost 97 percent of the money between the two major candidates.

Apple employees gave 91 percent of their dollars to Mr. Obama. At eBay, Mr. Obama took 89 percent of the money from employees.

Over all, among the 10 American-based information technology companies on the Forbes list of “most admired companies,” Mr. Obama raised 83 percent of the funds between the two major party candidates.

Mr. Obama's popularity among the staff at these companies holds even for those which are not headquartered in California. About 81 percent of contributions at Microsoft, which is headquartered in Redmond, Wash., went to Mr. Obama. So did 77 percent of those at I.B.M., which is based in Armonk, N.Y.

It does not require an algorithm to deduce that the sort of employees who might be willing to donate substantial money to a political campaign might also be those who would consider working for it.

If Democrats have the support of 80 percent or 90 percent of the best and brightest minds in the information technology field, then it shouldn't be surprising that Mr. Obama's information technology infrastructure was viewed as state-of-the-art exemplary, whereas everyone from Republican volunteers to Silicon Valley journalists have critiqued Mr. Romney's systems. Mr. Romney's get-out-the-vote application, Project Orca, is widely viewed as having failed on Election Day, perhaps contributing to a disappointing Republican turnout.

This is not intended to absolve Mr. Romney and his campaign entirely. There were undoubtedly many bright and talented information technology professionals who worked for Mr. Romney, and who might have implemented a better product given better management.

Even if only 10 percent or 20 p ercent of elite information technology professionals would consider working for a Republican like Mr. Romney, this is still a reasonably large talent pool to draw from.

But Democrats are drawing from a much larger group of potential staff and volunteers in Silicon Valley.

Perhaps a different type of Republican candidate, one whose views on social policy are more in line with the tolerant and multicultural values of the Bay Area, and the youthful cultures of the leading companies here, could gather more support among information technology professionals.

Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Republican, raised about $42,000 from Google employees, considerably more than Mr. Romney did.



ABC to Broadcast Dick Clark Special on New Year\'s Eve

ABC will show a two-hour retrospective of Dick Clark's life on Dec. 31, hours before the ball drop broadcast that bears his name, the network said Wednesday.

“New Year's Rockin' Eve Celebrates Dick Clark” will run at 8 p.m., leading up to the 10 p.m. start of the traditional festivities in Times Square. Hosted by Fergie and Jenny McCarthy, the show will include clips from Mr. Clark's decades of television shows and interviews with people who worked with him.

Mr. Clark died in April at the age of 82. His famous New Year's Eve show will still be called “Dick Clark's New Year's Rockin' Eve with Ryan Seacrest,” as it has for several years. Mr. Seacrest began co-hosting in 2005, one year after Mr. Clark suffered a stroke.

This year he will be the solo host for the first time; Ms. McCarthy will contribute interviews with spectators. Three artists - Taylor Swift, Carly Rae Jepsen and Neon Trees - will perform live, ABC said.



The Breakfast Meeting: CNN\'s Identity Crisis and \'Downton Abbey\' in New York

If Jeff Zucker, the former head of NBC, does take over at CNN, he'll face one of the most baffling corporate identity crises in media. The cable channel is on its way to its most profitable year, but in the United States it suffers from poor ratings, layers of management and little sense of direction.

Angus Jones, the half in “Two and a Half Men,” who lashed out at the hit show in a video he made with a preacher from the Seventh Day Adventist Church, calling the show “filth” and urging people not to watch it, has now apologized to his colleagues. But the incident is not likely to have any effect on the show, a longtime ratings powerhouse which has already had to replace former star Charlie Sheen when we went on the offensive against the show's creator, Chuck Lorre.

NBC has hired Julian Fellowes, the creator of “Downton Abbey,” to produce a new period drama about the Gilded Age in New York City. In a statement released by the network, Mr. Fellowes ca lled the period, “a time when money was king,” although he may have been discussing the television business.

Rona Fairhead, the head of the Pearson group that controls The Financial Times newspaper, will leave the company in April, another sign perhaps that the paper will soon be on the market. Bloomberg LP and Thomson Reuters are seen as the most likely bidders.

The People's Daily, the official mouthpiece of China's Communist Party, has been widely mocked after it apparently fell for a parody from The Onion and reported that the North Korean ruler Kim Jong-un was named the “Sexiest Man Alive for 2012.” But the slide show that accompanied that article â€" 55 photos of the Kim Jong-un in a variety of absurd official poses â€" may indicate that at least one editor at The People's Daily was in on the joke.

Tom Ricks, the military author who said on Fox News Monday that the network was hyping the Benghazi story, insists he did not apologize after the se gment and that the Michael Clemente, Fox's vice president for news, is “making it up.”

TMZ has denied reports that it is interested in buying a drone to spy on celebrities. The Federal Aviation Administration has confirmed that the gossip outlet has not applied for authorization to operate an unmanned aircraft system, otherwise known as a drone.