|
THE CRUICKSHANK REDEMPTION?
Lots of stuff happening at Hollinger International. Connie Black was caught doing some improper things, but money will fix all that up. Meanwhile, John Cruickshank is the new Publisher / COO of the Sun-Times now that Black's Igor--F. David Radler--retreated along with his Lordship.
Tons of stuff has been written about it all, and I refer you to Romenesko for links to several good stories. One old story to look at in a new light is "Hollinger newspaper sales raise questions" by James Miller & Jim Kirk in the July 20th Chicago Tribune. Radler was pretty incensed by the story, wrote a letter to the editor to the Tribune that was not printed (duh!) so he emailed it to Romenesko & then the ST printed it themselves. Read "Sun-Times attacks Tribune's 'lies and distortions'" in Romenesko's letters section. Note that it's not linked directly, so you may need to look for the letter, posted 7/28/2003. On Wednesday's Chicago Tonight, Phil Ponce interviewed Cruickshank about his new position and any changes that may be happening. Ponce mentioned that some (mostly high-end) retailers were put off by Radler, which Cruickshank sort of acknowledged by saying that things will be a little different with a new person in charge. Ponce got a sort-of scoop when he asked if Stella Foster would be given a column, replacing Kup. I say sort-of because even if I expect it, it must be close to a done-deal. Cruickshank said that it was pretty much a done deal but they needed to talk with Stella, hopefully by the end of the week, before sealing the deal. He said that Stella got sick shortly after Kup's funeral and was at home recuperating. I have to wonder if perhaps a ST reporter was at Stella's bedside, writing an article that fondly recalled how the reporter met Stella and how much she'd be missed now that she was dead. Alas, Stella wasn't terminally ill so I guess we'll never know if someone was by her bedside writing a eulogy. As if anyone would give a shit about her anyway. The few emails I got about what I wrote last ish about Kup & Stella were all unflattering about Stella: "...an untrained secretary with a huge ego..." "...nearly as irrelevant as Kup..." "...probably pulled several plugs from the wall to power her laptop in his room..." "...I guess for four years she's been writing like a very, very old columnist?" On Thursday's Channel 32 9pm News, Walter Jacobson did a Perspective about how Kup's grandson David Kupcinet was vying to continue Kup's column. David writes a similar column for the Red Streak. Walter played it as a Stella vs. David battle (does that make Stella "Goliath?"), which was even more interesting considering Cruickshank pretty much announced Stella was going to get a column the previous night. I suppose the battle is really over the rolodex of contacts, but that can't be as valuable as it once was. I mean, does David really need the contact info for Lillian Gish and Hedy Lamarr? Better for him to keep doing the Red Streak column and then when the RS goes bye bye, try to hook on to the mothership. Anyway, it looks like Hollinger's papers are up for sale. Funny how the bigger newspaper conglomerates are not interested because the Hollinger papers aren't "market leaders". What they really mean to say is that unless they can buy papers that have monopolies in their markets, they just have no interest in competing with anyone. Wussies. By the way--when the time came for someone to design a logo for Hollinger, did the board just say "...something like the History Channel, only not as colourful"? Check out Hollinger's Logo and then check out The History Channel logo. Uncanny. |
|
LETTERS TO THE CME
No letters came to me this week.
|
|
ASK THE CME
No questions were asked of me this week.
|
|
OUT OF THE BOX
Way back in September (okay, not so way back) I predicted three shows would definitely fail this fall (Tarzan, Skin & The Handler). Skin & Tarzan have already been cancelled while The Handler is getting decent ratings and has a full season order. We'll see in June whether it survives for a second year.
I want to address a maddening habit in television. It's the habit of messing with a show's concept. It's stupid and I wish network executives would stop it. But they won't. And still they wonder why less and less people are watching their shows. That's because they have little regard for creativity and storytelling. I am growing ever so tired of seeing non-writers mess up creative ideas in the name of higher ratings. The usual result is an alienation of most of the show's fans and few new viewers. Alias The first season of Alias was incredible. It was a great spy show with the added twist that Sydney Bristow was a double agent and had to balance out her work for good and for the bad guys. Creatively, the show was close to a masterpiece. Unfortunately, not enough people watched and during the second season, Creator J.J. Abrams got the message that unless things were done, the show didn't have much of a chance. Abrams overhauled the show, gutting it of all the so-called "confusing" aspects of the show and making it one that people could watch on an occasional basis. During the first season and through most of last season I watched the show religiously. I've seen two episodes this year. Creatively, it's not as interesting as it had been. Sure, the characters are colorful, but the deep and intelligent plotlines aren't there anymore. Blame the network suits but give them partial credit for letting the show's creator tinker with it. Dragnet I loved the 1960's Dragnet and couldn't wait to see Dick Wolf's take on the show. Unlike many, I wasn't disappointed. Ed O'Neill was a very good Joe Friday and the stories were very well written. I loved the show. It got low ratings and was overhauled for season two. Rather than the show being about Joe Friday investigating crimes, it was Joe Friday heading up a team of investigators. It sucked shit. Cancelled. Blame the network for impatience. Hack I love this show. The critics don't like it, but they should at least support it because it's different. The show is about flawed people. Heroes that are anti-heroes. Corrupt but good. Forget the black & white, there is nothing but shades of gray with Hack. The show and its premise are very flawed, but once you accept that things are slightly askew, you can revel in the story. Philadelphia cop Mike Olshansky's life started to break apart once he got caught taking money from a narcotics crime scene. He lost his job, then his family broke up. Thing is, he wasn't the only dirty cop around and could have taken his partner Marcellus down with him-but didn't. The first season of Hack was a roller coaster of highs and lows. No matter how much good Olshansky did, his world kept crumbling around him. The beauty of the show was that the writers did not go for the happy endings where other shows would. Mike's marriage was never going to be fixed, and his relationship with Marcellus was never going to be rosy. His confidant was his old friend, Father Grzelak, a priest who had enough flaws of his own. Hack was a great show because it used a formula that wasn't like other formulas. It was a great story about flawed people. The second season of Hack came with a major revamp. Gone was Grizz. Gone was Mike's Ex (moved away). Gone was the introspective theme song, replaced with action music. Mike moves into a new house, meets his new neighbor/smoldering love interest (the very beautiful Jacqueline Torres) and a new sidekick. The show isn't bad without all the flaws in the characters, but it's definitely angling toward a very formulaic show. I presume that by the end of the season: Mike's life will be looking up, his guilt will vanish, things will be 100% fine between him and Marcellus, he'll be doing his neighbor regularly and everyone will have forgotten that he was a dirty cop. Formula. The show was better with all the flaws, though I'll admit I still watch it religiously. David Morse and Andre Braugher are two of my favorite actors. Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda This is the most disappointing show for me. It had so much promise then it was slowly killed creatively in its second season. Just as this, Andromeda's fourth season started, I read an interview with Kevin Sorbo in which he talked about how this season the show was going to be less confusing and uneven, and more like it was in its first season. The irony of this idea is the rumor that series creator Robert Hewitt Wolfe was forced out in the second season by Kevin Sorbo, who wanted more creative control. Seriously, the show only started to suck when Wolfe's original concepts for the show started changing. I don't know if the rumors are true, but it certainly does appear that someone with very little creativity took the reigns of the show and drove it into the ground. Wolfe pitched the basic concepts of Andromeda to Paramount when they were looking for the next Star Trek series after Voyager. When paramount decided to kill the franchise with "Enterprise" instead, Wolfe married his concepts with some of Gene Roddenberry's ideas and created "Andromeda". When Andromeda debuted, I thought the characters, the mythology and the writing in general were so good that it was far better than "Deep Space Nine" and "Voyager". It was a great show. Unfortunately, the show started to change in its second season as Wolfe was ushered out the door. It is no longer a great show. It's okay, but not appointment viewing for me anymore. |
