NBC's Jay Leno Experiment is a Bad Omen by Scott Christian
Unless your spacecraft just landed last week, I’m guessing that you’re familiar by now with the new order of things over at NBC’s 10pm time slot. In an attempt to focus solely on cost effectiveness, the network has tossed any attempt at real programming for the archaic comedy of one Jay Leno. Not that NBC has had much to speak of in recent years in the entertainment department, but this clear and admitted tactic of filling prime time with cheap product, ratings be damned, spells out a dicey situation not just for televised entertainment but for this country as a whole. To put it succinctly, Jay Leno is bad for America.
This is a purely suburban example I know, but seeing Jay Leno on week nights at 10pm (I haven’t actually watched his show and refuse to do so, the reason for which will become clear shortly) is sort of like when the once big fancy mall in your town starts sliding downhill and the Foot Lockers and Banana Republics are replaced by 99 cent stores and party supply warehouses. Sure it’s still technically a mall, but only the dregs still go there. The only reason it stays afloat is because the inventory was purchased at last weeks swap meet for a biscuit under thirty bucks. NBC has become the once fancy mall that replaced its carpet with linoleum and sells its cheap plastic wares under blinding florescent lights. Quality was sacrificed in the name of margin. Jay Leno at 10pm is not entertainment, Jay Leno at 10pm is borrowed time waiting for a land developer to turn him into condos.
Now, of course, this is just TV we’re talking about right? It’s not that important in the vast scheme of things. And besides, there’s plenty of good programming going on over at that cable TV complex. The problem is that despite what we educated classes would like to believe, TV is important. Not because it provides some landmark of cerebral evolution, but because it is entertainment, and what we are entertained by matters. Think about it. What is considered the greatest novel of the last 50 years? Gravity’s Rainbow? Beloved? Catcher in the Rye? The Satanic Verses? While it may be hard to pinpoint what could be the greatest novel, how much time have you spent discussing it. How many of the novels that have made the short list have you read? I’m a writer and I was a Lit major and I rarely discuss novels. Now, how often have you said a phrase like “he’s a close talker,” or “king of the castle.” For eight years the show Seinfeld added to the lexicon like no book ever could, and it was on NBC. M.A.S.H. going off the air was a bigger national conversation than Reagan winning in 1984. TV matters because entertainment matters. Entertainment, especially one as easy to access as TV, is communal, because we all like to be entertained.
If NBC sets a precedent for network TV that it no longer wants to entertain, it just wants to make a margin, then what will become of free to watch television? Yes the entertainment industry is a business where money speaks, but for the last century it was a balance between making money and having the prestige of making the best content. Look at the old studio system. Jack Warner knew how to make a buck, but he also knew when to lose a buck if it meant showing up Louis B. Mayer. Entertainment has worked on this delicate balance for a hundred years and now it’s coming unraveled. The response of course is to just tune in to cable. There are plenty of good shows on both the pay channels and basic cable. Everything on the USA Network (ironically owned by NBC) lately is a home run. But what about those that can’t afford cable. For the economically depressed, what to do?
This is where Leno is bad for America. Part of the biggest issue with socioeconomic division is the difficulty in bridging classes. The poor can’t afford cable, and as free to watch network TV dissolves, the ability of the lower class to connect with the national conversation becomes more tenuous. Essentially, low grade programming will cause intellectual atrophy among those who can’t afford quality entertainment. Not that TV on any level is a bastion of intellectualism, but it is a common uniter. Professors and gardeners have their favorite shows, and often they are the same. Again, a show like Seinfeld helps create a national consciousness by simply adding to the lexicon. Throw away comments made in daily conversation often begin life on TV shows. If two classes are watching two entirely different types of programming, then that means two entirely disconnected conversations. Two conversations means two swaths of society that don’t understand each other, and that by any definition spells trouble. Think things are bad now? Just wait. If the rest of the networks follow suit with bottom line programming, then the whole Dems v. Repubs divide is just the tip of the ice burg.
I’ll admit that I’ve never been a Jay Leno fan, but this newest turn has put me right off of him for good. I’ve got nothing against the man, for all I know he is a great guy (who doesn’t seem to like his show either), but I think his show, and NBC’s cavalier disregard for accessible, well made entertainment is a slippery slope that I want no part of. Sure we may have Community right now, but for how long? And for those who say it’s just TV, I say, look around, look at the last 50 years of our history. We are TV.
Almost exactly 55 years ago, this same article could have been written about radio. The "cable" of that day was that new fangled thing called television. And few could afford IT either.
And at this same time, newspapers are going under, with no suitable substitute in sight.
I don't entirely agree with the "just to get by cheap" argument on NBC. I think Leno at 10 was aimed at the "Lawrence Welkian" success that Dancing with the Stars (and to some degree late-season American Idol) has experienced. That type of "family/variety show" format has worked with great success for DWTS, and I think NBC might have been trying to tap into that.
I don't think they're succeeding with Jay, but I think it could be fixed... maybe.
Ratings have been poor for Leno so far, but NBC's idea is to make money when everyone else is in reruns. Jay will still be new, ratings will be better, and it IS so much cheaper to produce that even if ratings never approach an ER or other mega hit, they'll make more money.
NBC may make a mint on the less expensive Leno show, but what about the poor lead in to the 11pm local news?
How will the affiliates or more importantly the affiliate groups handle this?
What sort of reasonable pressure could station groups bring on NBC to change or offer compensation?
Something like dumping the last hours of the Today program for syndication or maybe using the Sunday morning hours for
paid programming instead of Meet The Press? Do the affiliates have any real power left?
"Everyone Should be aware that you're just a screen grab away from infamy."
Comcast, it would appear, is lusting after the NBC family of cable networks.
There are 12 or more of them. Then spin the network, O&O's and the affiliates off into history.
"Everyone Should be aware that you're just a screen grab away from infamy."
The bigger question: Is over-the-air network television even relevant anymore?
My children don't know the difference between WSAZ and HGTV.
How many people out there don't get television from a dish or from a cable provider?
Is that number small enough that the big players won't give a damn about them when money is on the table?
Over the air networks, while mostly watched on cable, still have vastly larger audiences than the pure cable channels. While they have deteriorated in the last decade, I believe the last couple years has seen somewhat of a resurgence (not sure, but I recall reading and seeing an article to that effect about this time last year). The top network shows are still bringing in 10-20 million viewers a week where most pure cable shows are ecstatic with 3- 5 million or so.
NBC doesnt' make a dime off local news, so they don't care much about it. I wonder if they have research that shows their late night shows are no longer dependent on local news as a lead in.
genlock wrote:The only thing that could save over the air TV is local news.
It is the only unique thing they can offer.
God help them.
How long before some cable provider offers up their own local news?
Before you laugh, Time Warner in SE Ohio offers each school district its own local access channel.
Same deal for local government entities who are interested.
A few places have gone way beyond the computer genreated scroll that used to occupy these channels.
Air time for news and other local programs can be bartered or sold.
The cable provider wouldn't have one extra dime in creating the content.
It may start out as a primitive looking operation at first, but ... think about it.
I wonder if Leno at 8 ET might be better than at 10 ET? The lowball lead-in numbers for the late local news are hurting NBC affiliates all across the country. I had overnights e-mailed to me for a number of major/mid-major markets from last Wednesday and it was startling to see the impact that the low Leno lead-in had on otherwise strong NBC affiliate newscasts.
I'd say Leno at 5pm, 7pm, or 8pm makes more sense than at 10pm. Make Leno the new Oprah or Ellen -- a talk show host who interviews people and offers more of a family fare from a male standpoint. 10pm is better suited for the edgier shows and the quality production stuff. If I have a choice between Nip/Tuck or Rescue Me and Leno, Leno will lose out every time.
Sales organization already in place.
Transmission system in place.
Internet systems usually in place.
Just a newsroom, stringers, feed stuff back on the net.
Hundreds of eager youngsters wanting news jobs.
A new newscast every hour or half hour.
All local news, sports, weather, features.
Keep overhead down, use good consumer cameras and editing.
Couldn't be much worse than what we see at 6.
Could be a lot better than the WHCP offering.
"Everyone Should be aware that you're just a screen grab away from infamy."
