Our Drama Choices Have Evolved – We Care Less about Erica’s 10th Marriage and More About How the Housewives Will Keep Buying Berkin Bags if they Get Divorced

It’s so sad that the daytime dramas many of us watched as teenagers and young adults are dying.   

The cancellation of ABC’s “All My Children” and “One Life to Live” means we’re close to the end of the serial TV format that brought us such loved and hated characters as Erica Kane, Tad Martin and the Buchanan family – and so many hours of conversation about them.

Yes, “General Hospital,” “Days of Our Lives” and “Young and the Restless” remain, but probably not for long.

It’s been mentioned in news articles that more people now get their drama from reality TV and it's true that more water cooler talk now revolves around “American Idol,” “Survivor,” the “Real Housewives” and, sadly “Jersey Shore.”

The good news is that this transition demonstrates evolution.  We’ve grown up.

You have to admit that following the lives of made-up people on a day-to-day basis and talking about them as if they were real is a little weird.  Here in the 21^st century when most of us can make movies on our cell phones and produce video in an instant, we’re a little too sophisticated and cynical to be concerned that Sonny’s going to get shot for the hundredth time or that Luke and Laura will never get back together.

Now we worry about actual living beings, even though we don’t know them from Adam Chandler.  Who’ll get voted off the island?  Will “The Situation” keep his washboard abs?  Which celebrity loser will Donald Trump fire?  How will the housewives keep buying Berkin handbags if they get divorced?

We even follow second and third tier TV.  I’ve been on the streets of Manhattan with friends who point out: “There’s so-and-so from the third season of “Project Runway!”

But at least they’re real people.   We’ve evolved all right.  I wonder what’s next?  Following the people on “You Tube” who make their kids do crazy things for their Flip video cams.  Oh, right, Flip is dead now too.

Katie Couric May Be Smarter than the Brass at CBS

I wrote last week about what’s ahead for the three major broadcast networks in the wake of Katie Couric’s reported departure from the "CBS Evening News."

Today, the other side of the story: should we feel sorry for Katie?

Absolutely not.  Word is spreading that Couric and her former NBC “Today” co-anchor Matt Lauer are shopping a talk show together. 

What could be better for both of them? Unless they have the worst lawyers and agents in the word, they’ll own the show as Oprah owns hers.  They’ll share in the profits; they’ll make the business and content decisions. The only thing at stake is their friendship.

As long as their new program draws viewers, neither Katie nor Matt will have to answer to producers or network suits.  All they have to do is make a deal with the right syndication folks, hire a great staff and use their innate talents to smile and chat.  I suspect they’re not crazy enough to go for a morning program, so they won’t even have to get out of bed before dawn.

And the timing is right.  Regis Philbin is leaving “Live!” and Oprah will be buried on her own cable network where fewer viewers will be able to find her.

If the rumors are true, Katie Couric and Matt Lauer have a fantastic idea. They won't look back at their days at CBS and NBC.  Whatever deal they make, they’ll strike gold and they’ll be in control.  I wonder if their first guests will be Sarah Palin and Kanye West.

Does Couric's exit spell the end of the Evening News format?

Is the half-hour evening news format dead?  With Katie Couric reportedly leaving the “CBS Evening News” when her contract expires in June, the buzz in the TV news business is that the end is near for the three network newscasts. 

I don't think the format is dead yet because there remains a substantial combined viewership, but if I were Brian Williams or Diane Sawyer, I might be somewhat concerned.  

With no network evening news, where would we go to find the top stories of the day?  Americans are no longer reaching for their newspapers.  And the Internet has plenty of news, but I think we’ve gotten used to having some outlet where we can find the day's events wrapped in a tight package. The absence of news on CBS, ABC and NBC would leave a huge hole.

The network news shows average slightly more than seven million viewers each, with a total of 22 million.  Couric trails the others significantly.  In the coveted demographic of adults 25-54, the programs are drawing only six and a half million people combined. 

By contrast, American Idol last week had 24 million viewers.

That’s a huge difference, but there remains a loyal audience.  Further, what’s offered on cable is limited.  CNN and MSNBC do not offer news in the evenings.  Their programming after 5 p.m. eastern is mostly analysis punctuated by a few headlines.

HLN is the only outlet with a bona fide news broadcast, “Prime News,” at 6 p.m. EST.  Fox has “Special Report,” news (biased as it is) for the first 30 minutes and commentary for the second.

So, either the cable outlets step up or the Big Three continue with their losing newscasts.

Personally, I believe NBC should move Brian Williams to MSNBC (perhaps simulcast on NBC) with a longer form program better suited to his style - headlines with more in-depth reporting and interviews. 

With Williams in place, CBS and ABC could throw in the towel.  They don’t have an outlet analogous to MSNBC, though they could buy one or merge with one, like the struggling CNN. 

It would be sad if there were no place on television for Americans to get their news each night and it’s unlikely that the situation will change anytime soon.  But change in the broadcast television news business is all but certain.

TV Newser and the Daily News have reported that Scott Pelley or Harry Smith is in line to succeed Couric and that the “Evening News” will continue.  I think either of those two choices is weak and that CBS will have to do a lot better to stay in the race.  I still say someone of Anderson Cooper’s stature, or Anderson himself, could be the answer.

Bring "Morning Joe" to CBS; It will Easily Compete Against GMA and "Today"

If you're watching “Good Morning America” or the “Today” show (you can’t be a CBS “Early Show” viewer - no one is), it's time to try something new. 

Those shows have minimal news and politics and way too much emphasis on movies (produced by the networks’ parent companies), interviews with celebs from the same movies, cooking segments and icky human interest/tug-at-the-heartstrings stories about people in the midst of unfathomable tragedy.

I suggest an alternative – “Morning Joe” on MSNBC with Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski and Willie Geist.  With their rotating band of intellectual contributors from the worlds of journalism and politics, this program is head and shoulders above the competition.  A friend and colleague recently remarked to me that “Morning Joe” is the best show on television, period.  He may be right.

There have been rumors that CBS is, indeed, trying to woo the group for a move to that network, perhaps for the morning drive period.  That would be wonderful.  More viewers than those available on cable should be exposed to this unique program.

The show features free form dialogue about national and world events directed by Scarborough (a former Congressman) and Brzezinski, but Scarborough mostly dominates.  Willie Geist adds humorous observation and commentary.  Other regulars are the mercurial Mike Barnicle and the amazing, yet conservative, Pat Buchanan who is a walking encyclopedia of American politics in the 20^th century.

Tomorrow’s “Morning Joe” lineup, for instance, includes Buchanan, Barnicle, Tina Brown, the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein, Michel Gabaudan, president of Refugees International, Howard Schultz of Starbucks, education reformer Geoffrey Canada, Randi Weingarten, CNBC’s Erin Burnett and Charles Best.   

Celebrities like Sara Jessica Parker and Oprah Winfrey have been on as guests and say they are regular viewers.

What's best is that the conversation is for adults, those who can respect and understand both sides of an issue without being insulting or insulted.  It also lacks the conventions of typical talk shows where segments are tightly timed and where the jokes are puns giggled between anchorpersons.  Here, there’s genuine, unscripted humor and sarcasm.

On MSNBC, “Morning Joe” beats CNN and HLN in the morning.   For the first quarter of 2011, it had 449,000 viewers to “American Morning’s” 322,000 and “Morning Express with Robin Meade’s” 316,000, topping “American Morning” for the fifth consecutive quarter.  This quarter marks the best total viewer delivery for “Morning Joe” since the last quarter of 2008, one year after its debut.  Compared to 1Q10, “Morning Joe” is the only cable morning news program with growth in every ratings category this quarter, including a 26% increase among total viewers and 23% growth in the 25 to 54 age group.

That’s great for cable (though it doesn’t beat Fox), but “Morning Joe” could have a far bigger audience and much more influence on broadcast television.   Joe Scarborough told the New York Post's Page Six earlier this month that he and Mika Brzezinski are not considering going to another network, despite rumors that they were looking for a syndication deal and that CBS is interested in them.

I hope that’s not the case, though I will continue to be a regular viewer no matter where they show up.  Next month, the team heads to London to cover the royal wedding for the week leading up to the big event on Friday, April 29th.  With all the serious news in the world, their coverage of the Prince William/Kate Middleton affair should be a nice break and it will have an interesting take compared to what will air on CBS, NBC and ABC.  I’m looking forward to it.

"The Good Wife" is Getting Good

The "Good Wife" is getting much better, and it was pretty good to start with.

If you missed last night's episode, it was revealed that Kalinda, the dastardly investigator at Lockhart Gardner, once slept with Peter (Chris Noth) in return for political favors.  This is especially intriguing since Kalinda and Alicia are becoming closer and closer friends.

We also learned that Will has a questionable past.  At a former firm, he seems to have stolen something.  We don't know what or how, but he says "I paid my debt." Maybe, but I know a loose end when I see one.

At the law firm, there is further trouble.  Since the sinister Derrick Bond left, the firm must keep every client or risk the likelihood that all will flee.   The fact that Lemond Bishop, the one who's a drug kingpin, seems to have killed his wife could prove damaging.

This show keeps getting better.  It's more intriguing, more entertaining and even much more humorous than it was.

The directors have loosened up the character of Alicia.

They introduced her brother, who is a hoot.

And they're letting the Florrick children act like real kids; they're more than the usual prop children.  They interact with adults on a normal level and use their own wiles.  The scenes with Grace, Zach and Eli Gould (the chameleon, Alan Cumming) are especially funny. I loved it when he shrieked, "You kids are evil!"

The writers are graceful in the way they dance around political correctness with dialogue about black versus white, and whom Peter, the candidate, can be seen with, depending on whether he's courting liberals or conservatives.

I have complained about "The Good Wife" in the past because of some plot devices that were smarmy, like missed phone calls and deleted voice mail messages.

But I now have high hopes for what's to come, especially during May sweeps when the heat gets turned up in all shows.

Will Alicia turn to Will when she finds out about Kalinda and Peter? Will Will's secrets return to wound him?  Will Lockhart Gardner go up in flames?  Probably yes (temporarily), yes (but not fatally) and no (there has be another season).

Either way "The Good Wife" will be fun to watch.

Should "House" Have Gone the Musical Route?

I’m not a regular viewer of “House,” but not because I don’t think it’s a great program.  Hugh Laurie is immensely talented as is the rest of the cast.  The writing is superb and the premise and situations are as unique and sophisticated as any television program in the 21^st century can be.  I just don’t like hospitals.

However, a recent episode that had a musical interlude was brought to my attention.

When Cuddy (Lisa Edelstein), House’s boss/girlfriend, is set to undergo surgery for what is thought to be cancer, the man in her life starts to check out.  Emotionally, he can’t handle the pressure until he self prescribes Vicodin.  She responds to his instability by breaking up with him.

What happens during her surgery, though, is what I’d like to address…the introduction of a musical segment disguised as a dream sequence.

Is “House” jumping the shark?  Or is it just that Fox is capitalizing on the popularity of Glee by imposing production numbers on all its programs?

Many will remember when a past Fox hit, “Ally McBeal” resorted to such devices.  The show went downhill fast.

While Dr. House has always had a vivid imagination, I think the introduction of song and dance is a bit overboard.  A show based on supposed grit and realism should not veer into the absurd.

Yes, it was creative and the segment itself was colorful and well-directed, but it was out of character for the program.  In addition, there seems to be a setback for the title character.  He’s going backward instead of forward by returning to drugs.  That’s not unusual for an addict, but a TV program that gets stuck is one that gets closer to cancellation. 

Perhaps “House” has run its course, but feedback from viewers shows there are still tons of viewers.  At the end of last season the show was number 19 in the ratings, down from its top ten status, but popular nonetheless.   During the week of March 13, 2011 “House” was number three among all prime time broadcast programs, probably because of the “special” episode during sweeps.

I hope the loyal audience is not disappointed by writers and producers whose creativity may be stalled in season seven.  There are still a great many people rooting for House and Cuddy - who doesn’t have cancer, by the way.

Katie Couric's Replacement: Harry Smith? CBS Can Do Better

Richard Huff writes in today’s Daily News that it doesn’t matter much who takes over for Katie Couric if her contract at the CBS Evening News is not renewed, that a canteloupe could replace her and ratings would not change precipitously.

He lists a number of potential ho-hum replacements like Harry Smith (zzzzz), Jeff Glor and Lara Logan.

I say a stand-out replacement could put CBS ahead of the pack.  CBS News could really benefit from an individual who could bring something new to the anchor desk besides the typical good looks, news reading and occasional location reports and big interviews.

Anderson Cooper would be huge.  He could bring the world to people’s living rooms.  With his intrepid style and his single-minded devotion to his job, Cooper would be the anchorperson of the 21^st century.  Plus, he's already a contributor to "60 Minutes."

George Stephanopoulos isn’t as adventurous, but he does know everyone and has the requisite insider’s knowledge of national and world situations.  I’ll bet he’s itching to get away from the cooking segments and movie promotion required for his current gig at ABC’s Good Morning America.

Christiane Amanpour is another candidate with muscle.  She has the international chops, but she’s less well known and is probably less likely to be welcomed by a mass audience due to her foreign accent developed during her childhood in Iran and schooling in England.  On the other hand, she’s fluent in Persian and French, which gives her some gravitas. 

And how about Joe Scarborough, the former Republican Congressman who is now the moderate host of his own political talk show, “Morning Joe” on MSNBC?  In his few years at the program, Scarborough has proven his knowledge of events and issues and seems to move from topic to topic with ease.  The list of people in his circle of influence has grown exponentially and he also would bring a new dimension to the role because he’s not afraid to discard old conventions and start something new.  “Morning Joe” is the most novel talk show on television because it's free form yet intellectual.

My first choice would be Cooper, by far, but I think the list mentioned by Huff is not ambitious enough for a news operation with the history of CBS News.  The program needs someone with oomph.