Katie Leaves Today -- Finally

I'm not sure if it was the 20 people wearing t-shirts thanking her for saving their lives. Or maybe the adoring shots of her parents watching as Martina McBride sang an ode to women everywhere. Or Ann Curry pretending she's not pissed off and passed over.

Whatever it was, NBC's three-hour sendoff this morning for Today show co-host Katie Couric -- Did you hear she's going to anchor evenings at CBS in September? -- brought to mind that old Country & Western tune: How Can We Miss You, If You Won't Ever Leave?

At least, we'll get a brief break from Katie-mania as the titan of morning TV takes off June to prepare for succeding dan Rather as the face of CBS News.

In case you missed the paper today, I prepared my own tribute to Her Perkiness, balanced by columnist Sue Carlton's much better-written and more respectful tribute. And in case this morning's lovefest wasn't enough, here's a link to NBC's online shrine to its departing icon and her farewell speeches.

I know the Katie hype has been unbearable -- a traveling colleague even called me this morning from Arkansas to insist I denounce the shameless feteing -- but such displays are to be expected for the woman who upgraded the female role on morning TV shows and logged a marathon 15 years on that timeslot's highest-rated program. (also, according to the New York Daily News, the network sold 25 percent of its ad space for today's show at double the usual rate -- $110,000 per 30-second spot)

See ya later Katie. Here's hoping you ignore all of us and make folks care about the evening news again.

Walking the Walk on Journalism Ethics

From the moment I met Post Register executive editor Dean Miller at a get-together for ethics fellows at the Poynter Institute, I knew this was a guy with a sharp ethical sense and energy to bring that to his news report.

But I was still impressed after perusing the Newsroom Ethics Web page he created for the Idaho Falls paper, which walks the walk on accountability and ethics in a way few newspapers manage -- even as the internet forced mroe accountability than manistream journalists have ever faced.

There's a simple reason why big journalism institutions find it so hard to be transparent about sticky ethical situations: It gives power to the public, which expects consistency, fairness and accountability in such decisions.

That's why it's so remarkable that Miller has offered such a comprehensive site, including a list of stories affected by their ethical codes, a list of ethical conflicts disclosed by staffers and a list of the newspaper's transgressions -- including his own attempts to pass along story ideas on a school district race he had recused himself from handling because his wife was one of the candidates (according to the Web site, his fellow editors told him providing the story ideas was inappropriate, regardless of their quality).

Miller even advises complaining readers to contact another news outlet if they fail to sufficiently address a complaint!

Newspaper veterans know Miller is letting himself in for a deluge of nonsense from cranks who will never be satisfied with the paper's coverage. But he's also setting a standard for disclosure and transparency that is groundbreaking for its candor and aggression.

I just hope he's rewarded with the appreciation from readers that he deserves.

Net Neutrality Debate Distorted to no One's Surprise

I wrote a little while ago about the little-known issue of net neutrality -- the idea that telecom companies may be forced by law to treat every Internet company using its pipeline the same regardless of financial or political ties.

If conducted honestly, it's a heck of a debate: do you leave the Internet unregulated and let big telecom companies cut huge deals to give faster access to companies which pay them bucketloads of money? Or do you preserve the level playing field for small fry online providers by forcing regulation on a largely-unregulated space?

Unfortunately, there are groups who are not interested in an honest debate, attempting to confuse consumers by only tellnig part o the story. One ofthese groups is Hands Off the Internet, a group with a grass-roots sounding moniker which is founded and funded by AT&T, BellSouth, Cingular wireless, Alcatel and many other companies which stand to make loads if Congress doesn't act on Net Neutrality legislation.

The group has TV ads telling consumers Net Neutrality will force consumers to pay for the next generation of the Internet. As if the telecom companies behind Hands Off the Internet won't spread the cost of whatever they spend on improving their Internet infrastructure to their customers -- while also charing a premium for the fastest access.

It's a dishonest con playing off the fact that most consumers still have no idea what Net Neutrality means. Too bad these guys couldn't find a more truthful way to safeguard their bottom line.

Covering Rescue Me: A Fanboy's Dream

Since Chase Squires left the building a few weeks ago, I've been asking Mother Times for the opportunity to do a few TV critic-type stories. And nothing has given me more pleasure in recent weeks than pulling together today's story on the best show on television: FX's Rescue Me.

After the messy death of Denis Leary and Peter Tolan's crack ABC comedy about a sleazy police detective, The Job, I lamented that these two guys would never find a way to get their subversive, bold comedy vision on network TV.

Then came FX's firefighter-based Rescue Me: a perfect distillation of knuckleheaded guy stuff (going to AA meetings to pick up hot chicks; sleeping with women because they had access to good drugs), sidesplitting humor (the station chief, a degenerate gambler, stops fighting a fire to check game scores on a buring apartment's TV) and knife-edged drama (the death of character Tommy Gavin's son, killed by a drunk driver).

All this comes courtesy of Leary's Gavin, a reprobate firefighter who is Superman on the job and a schmuck everywhere else. This is the kind of series HBO should be doing -- subverting the typical hero worshipping firefighter shtick to show off guys who struggle to get through each day without going postal.

Here's some quotes I couldn't squeeze into today's story.

Leary on the psychology of firefighters: "Everything is seen through the prism of what they do. Walking around in the neighborhood where their firehouse is, they look at every building as a possibility. They’re looking at the structure and they’re looking at the ways out and when they look at a heavy person in the street they think, boy – I hope I don’t have to save her or him. I just never goes away. ...(And) if that’s what you wake up with every day, it’s going to be really difficult to get through some of the things in your personal life. You can very quickly cut to the chase in terms of what’s bullshit and what’s not bullshit. Because you have to do it every day.”

Guest star Susan Sarandon on people accusing her of political correctness in her work: "I think people use the term political correctness when they don’t want to deal with an untruth. Sometimes when I’m working with a movie and it has a racial storyline...and all the people of color are crackheads or fanatics, I'll say something and they'll resist. 'Oh, come on Susan, do you have to be so politically correct?' they'll say. But to me, it’s about making things truthful. When you call them on something and say 'Why is it that every woman in this movie who has sex has to die?' They don’t really want to deal with what would make something more honest. They want to keep reinforcing those stereotypes.”

Leary on why he is an actor and not a firefighter: "After age 13, when I did the school play at St. Peters (high school)...I witnessed as a 13-year old that all the prettiest girls were in the plays. And I felt like I had gotten a secret...I went back and told my guys you’re not going to believe it, but all the hot girls are in the musicals. By the time I got to high school, all the jocks were trying to get into the musicals to hang around with the girls. I also got to witness the party thing – which is that, after the musical is over, the last night, there’s a giant party. I got to see the girls dancing and drinking and hanging out with the guys. And man – I’m in. I like this job."

Sarandon on people's sense that she only does political films these days: "Every film is political, you only notice the ones that challenge the status quo. When you look at what Eddie Murphy did with the Nutty Professor, where the fat guy got the girl and the message was, look past the surface appearance. That’s a political statement just as much as an Arnold (Schwarzenegger) movie is political, because it's confirming a system of severe justice or telling you women are disposable."

Leary on when he knew his ABC series, The Job, was going to be cancelled: "(ABC Entertainment President) Susan Lyne came out saying, 'We’re switching gears; we’re going to be about family entertainment.' Peter (Tolan) called me up and said, 'Did you see the papers? Did you see that quote. We’re dead. Family entertainment: The Job is the f---ing antithesis of that.' They started making those shows According to Jim and George Lopez, and I’m thinking, 'Who the f--- is George Lopez? I didn’t know who he was – (co-star Lenny Clarke) explained it to me. And now he’s a big f---ing network star. So what do I know?”

Reward a guy (and a gal) who isn't afraid to say what's on his mind. Watch Rescue Me tonight. (And check out this way cool short with some of the characters)

Iraq War Claims More Journalists' Lives

For months now, experts have been saying the conflict in Iraq is the most dangerous for journalists in recent memory. The media industry got another stark reminder Monday when news broke that two CBS journalists had been killed by a roadside bomb, while another was seriously injured.

CBS photographer Paul Douglas and soundman James Brolan were killed, along with a U.S. solider and an Iraqi translator who were examining an Iraqi checkpoint when the bomb went off. CBS correspondent Kimberly Dozier was also seriously injured in the blast. The network paid tribute to all three during its newscast Monday, noting that Britisher Douglas -- the first person of African descent to die covering Iraq -- was good natured and disarming, while Brolan, a former soldier in the British army, had a gift for making others laugh.

Former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather told a story on CBS' web site about Douglas rushing to place his body between Rather and an incoming mortar while on assignment in Sarajevo -- fortunately, the ordinance was a dud.

"Paul Douglas and James Brolan were not your average pros," Rather wrote Monday. "They were among the best in the world at what they did, and among the bravest. Kimberly Dozier still is, as she fights for life. They proved their mettle and their professionalism time after time, in one dangerous dateline after another."

The Commitee to Protect Journalists has long cited the war in Iraq as particularly dangerous for journalists, citing 69 journalists' deaths (not including Douglas and Brolan) compared to 66 journalists killed in Vietnam, 68 killed in World War II and 17 killed in the Korean War. The committee also cites 26 support staff killed.

Many of those killed have been Iraqi journalists, either working for Western news outlets or their own news organizations. While they can travel through the country without the same fear of kidnapping that western journalists face, they are still target for assasination for the news they report.

It particularly difficult at times like this to accept those who insist journalists in Iraq are willfully ignoring or downplaying positive news to damage President Bush or the GOP or some other nonsensical hypothesis. I've done several stories on the dangers of reporting from this particular war zone, and the journalists I've interviewed have always seemed courageous, conscientuous and dedicated. Even as noted colleagues fall victim to kidnapping, bombings and shootings, these folks have put themselves in the lion's mouth again and again to bring the nation important information on a crucial military operation.

And on Monday, CBS and the entire media industry, were reminded how dear the cost can be.

Reporter Writes Letter, Gets Fired and Becomes Story Subject

It is the First Commandment for journalists in today's media drenched environment: Thou shalt not embarrass the institution for which you are employed.

That was a lesson, apparently, George Tanber didn't heed before sending a letter to the Pulitzer Prize committee anonymously claiming one of the Toledo Blade newspaper's prime investigative pieces was ethically flawed.

After revealing his authorship of the letter, Tanber was suspended, then fired, then made the subject of a 3,200-word story dissecting the issue and what he did. So gossipy it should have been a soap opera script, the Blade's expose revealed a host of new details, including:

Tanber's history of insubordination at the paper, from placing firecrackers in people's cigarettes to resisting efforts to edit his work until he was removed from stories.

Tanber's correct allegations about former Blade political writer Fritz Wenzel, including Wenzel's accepting freelance work with the Zogby polling company while writing about their polls, his son accepting jobs with the Ohio GOP organization while Wenzel was a political reporter and Wenzel receiving a $60,000 job from a GOP legislator days after resigning the paper to form his own consulting firm.

Tanber's efforts to get other journalists to challenge the Blade's journalism, communicating with reporters using aliases and multiple email accounts.

It is a brutal excavation of a troubled employee's surprisingly thourough efforts to discredit his employer. And although it may at times play like a hit piece designed to justify the newspaper's decision to fire Tanber, the slime oozing from these situations greases everyone involved.

Apologies for News Coverage: Do They Change Today's Reality?

My friend Richard Prince has an interesting item on his Web site today about the Tallahassee Democrat's decision to apologize for coverage of the civil rights era which sided with segregationists.

Fifty years ago this past week, two Florida A&M students were arested for refusing to get off the Whites only section of a bus. It was the beginning of a months-long bus boycott in Tally, months after Rosa Parks' arrest ignited a similar protest in Montgomery, Ala., and the Tallahassee Democrat did what most big papers do in such situations -- it sided with the mainstream, which meant supporting the segregationists.

"Leaders in that journey toward equality should have been able to expect support in ending segregation from the local daily newspaper, the Tallahassee Democrat," wrote the newspaper's publisher and executive editor in an essay. "They could not. We not only did not lend a hand, we openly opposed integration, siding firmly with the segregationists."

Such apologies have surfaced intermittently in recent years, as southern newspapers which didn't have the stones of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution under Eugene Patterson (see what I mean here and here) have stepped forward to admit how badly they misjudged the civil rights movement, focusing their coverage to ignore its leading lights and support the racist subjugation of black Americans.

In July 2004, the Lexington Herald-Leader apologized for its coverage of the civil rights movement in commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Civil rights act of 1964. That same year, the Hattiesburg American in Mississippi issued a similar apology for ignoring the Freedom Summer protests after the 1964 killing of three cilvil rights workers in that state. And the Birmingham News in February published an array of photos from the civil rights era that it suppressed back in the day.

That such apologies are still controversial remains saddening. That it took 40 years for these institutions to admit their missteps is maddening. And while some object to them as dredging up old news -- somehow I doubt those who were marginalized in articles seeking to downplay racial violence of that time would feel similarly -- I resist them for another reason.

Apologies for the past are nice. But what are we doing about the future?

The fact is, the lessons learned from the country's reaction to the '60s-era civil rights movement could inform our coverage of many current civil rights struggles -- if we let it. But many news outlets remain hesistant to transfer those lesson to new fronts -- perhaps challenging the way the GOP scapegoated gay people for the 2004 elections, or fingering the xenophobia at the heart of many anti-immigration protests or identifying new civil rights struggles in their midst.

Instead, the San Francisco Chronicle in 2004 told two lesbian journalists who were married that they could not cover gay marriage issues, kicking off an industrywide debate. And cable TV news shouters from Lou Dobbs to Bill O'Reilly have found surging ratings in playing to conservatives' worst fears about illegal immigration.

Can you imagine a mother of children in public school being told she can't cover education for a major newspaper? Or black journalists being told they can't write about racial issues? Or the nation's editorial boards tolerating an anti-biracial marriage Constitutional amendment proposal as a way of ginning up votes for an upcoming election?

Instead of learning the importance of respecting all civil rights struggles in our coverage, many journalists have chosen to act as if the black American Civil Rights movement was a moment trapped in amber -- a special case that rarely informs how we react to new events or situations. Thus we are left with the irony of GOP strategists apologizing for past use of anti-black sentiment to gain votes while manipulating anti-gay sentiments to the same end.

Hey newspaper editors of today: you want to really atone for past civil rights transgressions? Don't close your eyes to the new struggles under your nose. And learn to take a stand when it counts -- not 40 years after the battle is done.

Germaise Gets Stung Again

It's a bit of an experiment here at Mother Times, involving a follow-up story on ABC Action News reporter Don Germaise, the TV journalist who allowed himself to be interviewed by a white separatist and saw the video released on the Internet.

When I interviewed Don about what happened, he assured me there was no agreement to exchange an interview for an interview -- because, presumably, he knew that reporters are not supposed to trade something of value for journalistic access, not even an interview with themselves.

But then David Daugherty, the white separatist in question, produced a release form signed by Germaise, a series of emails in which Germaise agrees to an interview-for-an-interview arrangement, and video footage of Germaise acknowledging that they were indeed trading interviews.

So I have written a piece cobbling together this evidence, noting that Germaise doesn't seem to have been very truthful in his earlier statements. But because there hasn't been enough room in the last two days' newspapers to print the story, we posted it on the Times Web site today, with an eye toward publishing in the newspaper Friday (this is the second time we've done something like this with one of my stories, though the first one was never printed in the newspaper at all).

I'm glad the story is seeing print in some form, though I'm concerned about "scooping myself" by putting a version of the story online before it is printed in the newspaper. Yeah, I know, in the future, this is how its going to be done; print will likely be a minor adjunct to the Web site. But in the here and now, newsprint is the big stage -- so I'm nervous a good story will fall through the cracks.

And for those who wonder if we're not picking on Don a bit, all I can say is that, for us, this second story was more about Don's seeming lack of candor -- and his bosses' willingness to tolerate it -- than any views he or his interviewer might have expressed.

As always, your feedback is welcome.

THURSDAY UPDATE: Looks like Mother Times surprised me again -- finding room for the story on page 3B of today's newspaper by whacking off the last few graphs and making it the co-cover story of TBT (with a rather unobjective headline - IDIOT). I think this might keep me from getting invited to the Action News Christmas party this year.

American Idol Finale: Just a Few Questions

Fortunately, the stars didn't fall from the sky, natural laws remained in place, and when the dust settled, the clearly superior Taylor Hicks beat out bland bimbette Katharine McPhee tonight for the American Idol crown.

But I still have a few questions left:

-- Why did so many of the legends Idol producers brought in sound so much worse than the supposed novice contestants they were singing next to? (Al Jarreau, Toni Braxton and, especially, Meat Loaf, I am talking to you, people!)

-- How pissed was Live frontman Ed Kowalczyk when he stepped onstage and realized wannabe Chris Daughtry was almost an exact clone of him?

-- Can we give Mary J. Blige the Patti Labelle Bringing Down the House Award for blowing away blue-eyed soul pretender Elliot Yamin and showing the youngbloods how its done?

-- After many seasons of begging the little purple guy to let them use his music to no avail, how did they get Prince to set foot on that stage (notice no Idol wannabes were allowed to get near His High Heeled Wonder during his two-song extravaganza)?

-- Why was David Hasselhoff crying? (Because he knows that jiveass talent show of Simon's he's joined on NBC will be but a pale shadow of this grandeur)?

-- How disappointed are we that Paula Abdul didn't hop back on the crazy train for one last, wild ride?

-- Are we just resigned to the fact that Idol winners get way more votes than any politician -- 63-million votes, according to George Hamilton's long lost son, Ryan Seacrest -- including the President of the United States?

Weekly Planet Admits Loafing Early

Kudos to editor Dave Warner for fessing up when the alt newsweekly put out an edition with the name of its parent company and sister publications, Creative Loafing, plastered across the cover instead of the Weekly Planet. To confuse things further, longtime hipsters will recall that the Planet used to be called Creative loafing, while new school scenesters already know the Planert plans to change its name back sometime this fall.

So I guess this just means the Planet is so hip, it's ahead of itself.

ABC Finally Pulls the Trigger

In a move which has surprised few, ABC finally named Charlie Gibson sole anchor of World News Tonight -- kicking Elizabeth Vargas to the curb less than six months after she took the helm as network TV news' first Hispanic top anchor.

"(ABC News President David Westin) and I have been talking for some time about what would happen as my maternity leave approaches," Vargas said, offering TV news' version of the classic "resigning to spend more time with family" politican's excuse in ABC's press release. "My doctors have asked that I cut back my schedule considerably. What works best for me and my family is to return in the fall to 20/20 as I raise my new baby and young son."

Sad as I am for Vargas -- a competent anchor who was handed an assignment beyond both her talent and seasoning in the first place -- this had to happen. ABC came in last place among the three networks newscasts last week for the first time since 2001 -- inspiring a victory dance and lots of charts over at newly-second-place CBS. The suits at the alphabet network could see months in the future to Katie Couric's ascension at CBS and only see heightened viewership for their rival broadcast.

In a spasm of bad luck which has become typical for sad sack ABC, the ratings dip came during May's upfront ad season -- when advertisers and affiliate station executives were in New York to express their displeasure firsthand.

And Charlie Gibson becomes the luckiest guy in TV news, ascending to become the face of a network which has done all it could to shake him off-- first taking him off Good Morning America in the late '90s, and then denying him the top anchor gig for any length of time, preferring to bet on Vargas and Bob Woodruff -- whose return from a bomb blast in Iraq now seems an open question.

By the time Couric ascends to the throne, there will be three clear options: urbane and slick Brian Williams at NBC, old school good guy Gibson and whatever face the Perky One presents at CBS. As I have suggested before, now is the time for ABC to zero in on its Brian Williams, and spend years grooming him or her, while Gibson safeguards the franchise for five years or so.

As we've learned these past few years, network news viewership is still a long term game. Time for ABC to start thinking for its future as well as its present.

Assessing American Idol

When it comes to America's favorite talent show, I could not be more cynical.

And not just because it has become the embodiment of all that's wrong with modern-day pop music -- from the flood of inexperienced, barely talented, visually striking young performers who seem born in front of a camera, to the parade of bland, unchallenging material they are forced to sing.

As America prepares tonight to choose between the new school Michael McDonald-isms of Taylor "Soul Patol" Hicks and the bland sex appeal of Katharine McPhee, I gotta admit, I never saw the success of this show coming (50-million votes a week!).

And as much as the show's producers and resident crank Simon Cowell like to pretend otherwise, I don't think they anticipated it, either. On magazine cover after cover, the pieces all seem to ask the same question: Why this show?

My friend Charlie McCollum, the TV critic for the San Jose Mercury News, suggests it is the show's interactive component -- that viewers have taken control of the show from producers by voting for who stays and who goes. And here's where my cynicism kicks in; because I'm not sure how much control the viewers really have.

How can anybody be sure? Fox doesn't reveal many details of the voting publicly. We are told overall vote totals, but given no information by region of the country or time zone. We don't know how well-publicized breakdowns in telephone connections might affect outcomes, or how much determined speed voters might sway the proceedings. And considering this is the most-watched show on television and the crown jewel of the Fox network's season, there's really no incentive to manipulate the results for maximum drama.

Critics have groused about the lack of talent among the contestants -- David Spade tore it a new one on the Showbiz Show last week -- but that's also a big part of the show's appeal. Star Search proved that watching almost-professional performers is so old school it's almost prehistoric; watching the kid who can barely hit the note make it happen or not -- now that's spellbinding.

Like any good melodrama, there's plenty of backstage intrigue as well. The continuing onscreen disintegration of Paula Abdul is a strange sort of Karmic comeuppance for those of us who were stuck sitting through her videos when she was an MTV mainstay (I've met her twice, and both times she seemed a bit, shall we say, altered). When will Randy Jackson figure out that his streetwise patios is just dated enough to make him sound like the old guy at the club women always avoid? And can you call somebody a judge when they can't vote on the results?

Through it all, what really comes through is the skill of Cowell and his behind-the-scenes cohorts in crafting a weeks-long soap opera that starts with the worst wannabes on the planet and concludes with a freshly minted -- and contractually bound -- new star.

Still, I plan to park myself in front of the tube tonight to watch the final performances and tomorrow to catch Taylor's win. Because that's the best measure of compelling TV -- you watch it, even when you don't want to.

Modern Media as the Gang Which Can't Shoot Straight?

A widely circulated story about non-Muslims forced to wear colored badges by the Iranian Parliament.

A widely-circulated story about an airline developing stand-up seats to cram more people in flights.

What do these stories have in common? Both were attention-getting pieces which got wide play on TV outlets such as NBC's today show and CNN's Situation Room. And they were dead wrong.

Unlike USA Today's phone records story -- which the newspaper has not yet retracted, despite protests from two telephone companies featured in the story -- these two stories have been admitted as false. But the impact of such blunders may be with us for far longer.

As NYT public editor Barney Calame noted Sunday, the bad airline seat story resulted from imprecise questions from a reporter writing for the Times' front page for the first time. Turns out, the aircraft maker, Airbus, had abandoned the idea of stand-up seats two years ago.

The Iranian parliament story originated Friday with a report from an Iranian-born columnist for the National Post, a Canadian newspaper. And though the newspaper published a story written by different authors Saturday backtracking from the report, there was no explanation why the columnist originally reported what he did and no correction provided on the newspaper's web site. The erroneous story even led the St. Petersburg Times to publish a pointed editorial Saturday.

These are the kinds of stories which stick in the public consciousness when they think of journalists and journalism. Forget the CIA priso stories or NSA spying stories, getting this stuff wrong betrays a basic ideal -- that every bit of journalism the audiences gets from us is as true as we know it to be at the time.

I think we're all gonig to have to be more skeptical of such reports before we pass them on. it's too easy these days to wind up on the wrong end of a badly researched blockbuster.

Tony Snow Tries Mightily to Debunk White House Fox News Fixation

I know, I'm a lefty columnist who is expected to write such things. Still, I can't help noting surprise that Elizabeth Bumiller's NYT piece on new press secretary Tony Snow noting that he watched CNN tiptoed around the central issue.

As Bumiller notes, Fox News Channel has long been a White House favorite -- Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld often combat their bad press by submitting to friendly interviews there. The press has already complained that administration officials from Cheney on down insist TVs in their airplanes and offices remain tuned to the channel wherever they go.

So why not probe the implications of that issue? Why might the White House insist on such fealty to Fox? What does it say about FNC's reporting?

Instead we got another inside the beltway media piece which hints at a truth all involved already know, but few will say explicitly. Perhaps it's because I'm now reading Eric Boehlert's book on the press' failue in the run up to the Iraq war, Lapdogs, but I'm tired of stories which seem too coy to sa what they really mean. Because that didn't work too well three years ago.

National Public Radio Ups the Podcasting

Cool to see NPR jumping farther onto the podcasting bandwagon by offering 11 new downloads daily -- upping their total to 52 podcasts of everything from science reports by former ABC correspondent Robert Krulwich to music from the World Cafe broadcasts.

Backward-thinking executives might assume such services would keep listeners from tuning in affiliate stations and thus threaten donations. What we all know is those listeners are out of the mix already anyway -- a podcast might be just the thing to reconnect them with the NPR brand.

Given that users have downloaded 25-million podcasts in nine months, they just might be onto something...

Talk With White Separatist Brings Embarrassment for Local Reporter

He says it was a simple mistake -- an earnest blunder made while trying to help a source.

But an hourlong interview WFTS-Ch. 28 reporter Don Germaise gave last month to the webmaster of a white separatist Web site has now brought him loads of embarassment, as the group has posted a heavily edited excerpt which they say shows Germaise sympathizes with some of their views.

I have a piece in today's newspaper outlining the whole mess, which started when Germaise looked into profiling a local pro-White group after a recent incident in which some racists were accused of a stabbing murder.

David Daugherty, the webmaster for a site operated by the Tampa Unit of the National Vanguard separatist group, said he struck a bargain with Germaise: to get an interview with him, the reporter would also have to submit to an interview. Germaise denies there was quid pro quo agreement.

In the excerpts posted by Daugherty online, Germaise offers earnest if uninformed answers to some awfully leading questions regarding the Anti-Defamation League, hate speech, illegal immigration and the First Amendment (it has been particularly troublesome to see racists use recent confusion and anger over immigration issues to push their prejudice further into the mainstream).

Daugherty says he wanted to probe a journalist from the mainstream media, which he dismissed as filled with propaganda about pro-White movements and controlled by Jews. Germaise now says he made a dumb mistake, allowing himself to becoem a propaganda tool for a group whose perspectives he despises.

"They edit out all the parts where I tell them they are nuts," Germaise told me Thursday. "I should have known better."

Shield Law for Journalists on the Table Again

An impressive roster of lawmakers have lined up behind the Free Flow of Information Act of 2006, including Sens. Richard Lugar (R-IN), Arlen Specter (R-PA), Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Charles Schumer (D-NY). See Dodd and Lugar's op-ed on the issue here.

The act is a federal "shield law," aimed as protecting reporters from attempts by the government to force revelation of confidential sources, except for very specific instances -- say, if the reporter witnesses a crime or has information to guard against terrorism or protect national security.

Some journalists are uneasy about such laws, reasoning that if the press insists on special free speech protections we cease to become surrogates for the public -- relying on special priviledges the government can take away at any time. But prosecutors have increasingly pursued a strategy of plugging leaks about government business by compelling journalists to reveal their sources, dismantling their effectiveness as news gatherers.

Unfortunately, lawmakers had to include a national security/terrorism exemption to make passage possible in today's political climate. And the government has defined such terms so broadly, this legislation likely won't curb the highest-profile cases of confidential source excavations, including the Valerie Plame investigation and the Wen Ho Lee investigation. Journalists are pretty disappointed by the legislation, which has holes in it big enough to drive a truck through.

But as a reporter who has benefitted three times from Florida's shield law -- keeping me from having to testify in lawsuits connected to issues I have written about -- I can say pretty confidently that something is better than nothing.

Black TV Saved -- Sorta

The biggest news to come out of the revelation of the CW's programming schedule Thursday -- besides the horrible new logo and inexplicable rescue of both 7th Heaven and Reba -- was the preservation of a night of black-centered TV shows on Sunday, including the series Everybody Hates Chris, All of Us, Girlfriends, new series The Game and America's Next Top Model. Not surprisingly, every show in the evening has a superstar executive producer -- from Will Smith and Jada Pinkett to Chris Rock, Tyra Banks and Kelsey Grammer (?!).

My hunch is this was a response to the avalanche of stories predicting the demise of the black sitcom in the CW's merger of UPN and the WB. CW mastermind and CBS honcho Les Moonves is no dummy -- he knows that Sunday was one of the lowest-rated nights for the WB and so challenging for UPN that they never developed programs for the night.

So when low ratings plague the shows stuck in the CW's new black sitcom ghetto, they'll have plenty of good excuses for cancelling them later in the season. I just hope there's enough diversity elsewhere in the TV schedule to mitigate the loss.

Embedded War Coverage Found Objective By Pronouns?

It was an email from my alma mater, so of course I dove right into it.

As an alum and occasional guest lecturer at Indiana University, I've got nothing but love for the school of journalism and the home of the Hoosiers. But I gotta wonder what they're putting in the water these days at Big Red.

Seems a group of researchers looked at a "composite" 16-hour day of reporting by CNN from March 22 to March 23 2003 -- a time which would have been within a week of the war's March 18 start. They looked only at field reports -- 64 embedded and 46 non-embedded -- to conclude there was little support for the notion that journalists were not objective.

How do they know this? Because they looked at the pronouns.

Yes, the question of objectivity came down, not to story selection, which facts were reported or how the facts were delivered, but the question of whether reporters used "I" and "me" or "we." ""Non-embedded reporters were actually more likely to use the broad-ranged 'we' than embedded reporters, who never used it," reads the paper, "The 'I' of Embedded Reporting: An Analysis of CNN Coverage of the 'Shock and Awe' Campaign."

As someone who wrote about this very issue during the war, I find it interesting that IU's researchers avoided the cable channel which was the highest-rated during the conflict, Fox News Channel. (see another column on this issue here) I also find it odd that, in a war which attracted reporters from network TV news, cable news, newspapers, Web sites, radio stations and local TV stations, these researchers drew broad conclusions about how embedded reporting worked based on one TV outlet's work over a 16-hour period.

Those who have read my work before know I have highlighted Fox's conservative tilt in coverage and I wrote about their use of words like "we" for the military and "the enemy" and "our enemy" in reference to Iraqis. So how can you gauge the extent of objectivity by looking only at pronouns, avoiding the network which abused this language the most?

I have this sense that we're all getting a bit of collective amnesia about how some news outlets played the patriotism card in their coverage and promos during the war's early days. No one wanted to be labelled unpatriotic and some outlets tried hard to cast their own coverage in one light and cast aspersions on others.

But I guess I have IU to thank for something -- besides an interesting blog posting. Their J-school taught me to look behind the obvious spin in a press release to see what is actualy being said -- too bad their own researchers couldn't do the same.

Will & Grace & America's Attitude About Gay People

It was a quandary only Hollywood could produce.

Sitting with Eric McCormack in a hotel foyer eight years ago, I asked this handsome, witty, well-scrubbed actor exactly how much he resembled the new character he'd be playing in NBC's highest-profile new sitcom, Will & Grace.

In other words, was he gay?

McCormack, a savvy guy who had already been asked that question about 1,000 times, responded with a punchline: "My wife was asking me that just the other day. Of course, no one ever says to (then-ER star) Anthony Edwards, 'Have you ever done major surgery?'"

The line got the desired laugh and we moved on. But was a different time that was: ABC had just cancelled Ellen DeGeneres' sitcom amid controversy after she came out as a lesbian the year before. Rosie O'Donnell hadn't yet decided to come out, but Rob Halford and George Michael had. And pressure groups were still running full-page ads in American newspapers on how gay TV characters would ruin the country.

It's easy to forget, in a world of Queer Eye and the Logo cable channel, and the OutQ satellite radio channel and The Soprano's Vito Spatafore, that TV wasn't always so gay friendly.

And even though I've written about how network TV still can't bring itself to show gay love or gay sex, Will & Grace still helped make TV a little more hospitable to the idea. So let's all hoist a Cosmopolitan or two for the two-hour series finale tonight and say goodbye to a show which broke a lot of ground in its own, sly way.

(Check out the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation's info pack on W&G here.)

CBS Keeps Its Eye on What Works (insert groan here)

Say this for CBS: it knows what works on its schedule.

So far, they've fielded the fewest new shows of any networks, with just four new series joining the Tiffany Network's fall lineup as announced today. As expected, Out of Practice, Courting Alex and the CBS Sunday Movie is history, while Without a Trace and Amazing Race moves to Sundays and King of Queens takes a break until midseason.

Other than comedies on Mondays, CBS has become the network of crime, the military and reality, with a schedule dominated by series such as CSI, Numbers, Criminal Minds, Cold Case, The Unit and Close to Home.

The tone doesn't change much in the new shows, which feature James Woods as a cutthroat defense attorney-turned-prosecutor in Shark, Ray Liotta as the head of a criminal crew pulling a job in Smith (the messy death of Heist and Thief must really be encouraging there) and a drama about a town cut off by a nuclear explosion in Jericho.

Here's the sked, with new shows in bold and NT designating new times:

MONDAY
8:00-8:30 PM HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER (NT)
8:30-9:00 PM THE CLASS (N)
9:00-9:30 PM TWO AND A HALF MEN
9:30-10:00 PM THE NEW ADVENTURES OF OLD CHRISTINE
10:00-11:00 PM CSI: MIAMI

TUESDAY
8:00-9:00 PM NCIS
9:00-10:00 PM THE UNIT
10:00-11:00 PM SMITH (N)

WEDNESDAY
8:00-9:00 PM JERICHO (N)
9:00-10:00 PM CRIMINAL MINDS
10:00-11:00 PM CSI: NY

THURSDAY
8:00-9:00 PM SURVIVOR
9:00-10:00 PM CSI: CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION
10:00-11:00 PM SHARK (N)

FRIDAY
8:00-9:00 PM GHOST WHISPERER
9:00-10:00 PM CLOSE TO HOME
10:00-11:00 PM NUMB3RS

SATURDAY
8:00-9:00 PM CRIMETIME SATURDAY
9:00-10:00 PM CRIMETIME SATURDAY
10:00-11:00 PM 48 HOURS: MYSTERY

SUNDAY
7:00-8:00 PM 60 MINUTES
8:00-9:00 PM THE AMAZING RACE (NT)
9:00-10:00 PM COLD CASE (NT)
10:00-11:00 PM WITHOUT A TRACE (NT)

Up Next: Fox and the CW network, ending the suspense about what will survive from the network mash up of the WB and UPN. (Hint: if you're appearing on Eve or Everwood, might want to polish up those resumes)

ABC Hopes Lightning Strikes Twice. Again.

The tragic truth of today's TV game is that any network is just one or two hits from stupefying success. Or oblivion.

Just ask ABC, which spent two years riding the success of blockbusters Lost and Desperate Housewives -- developed, in part, by execs fired before they hit air -- only to face a daunting question.

What's next?

This year, ABC's answer is the kitchen sink approach, announcing today 15 new series over the course of 2006-07, including a show about robbing Mick Jagger (originally titled Let's Rob Jeff Goldblum. Seriously!) and series featuring Calista Flockhart, Anne Heche, Ted Danson (?!), Chi McBride, Taye Diggs and America Ferrara.

Out the door: Rodney, Sons & Daughters, Invasion, the newsmagazine Primetime, The Evidence, Commander in Chief, Freddie, Hope and Faith and Emily's Reasons Why Not (apparently, because nobody was watching). Grey's Anatomy moves to Thursdays facing stiff competition from CBS powerhouse CSI and NBC's buzzed-about Matthew Perry vehicle, Studio 60.

And Dancing with the Stars moves to two nights a week; a track record of head-scratching success matched only by Deal or No Deal's Howie Mandel and Idol reject William Hung.

What jumps out here is ABC's thirst for hip cachet (series directed by or produced by Jon Favreau, Salma Hayek, J.J. Abrams and Barry Sonnenfeld). Also the network seems addicted to slowly evolving episodic pieces -- Abrams' Six Degrees features New Yorkers slowly realizing they are connected, McBride's The Nine portrays a hostage standoff in a bank over a season, Big Day spends a season on wedding preparations and Diggs' Day Break finds him reliving the same day, over and over, to figure out who framed him for murder. Didn't the death of similarly stretched out series like Invasion, Surface, Heist and Thief teach these guys anything?

By far, the most interesting projects include Let's Rob..., which looks on paper like a My Name is Earl ripoff starring Donal Logue as a guy whose epiphany is -- let's rip off Mick Jagger (ABC execs changed from Goldblum, who had a deal with NBC, to Jagger when entertainment president Stephen McPherson went to a Stones concert; how L.A. is that?)

Betty the Ugly was originally conceived as an English-language take on the telenovella, but got reworked by ABC into a comedy about a playboy fashion magazine who bonds with his assistant (Ferrera, from The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) who is so plain he wouldn't think of sleeping with her. Ugh.

You've come a long way, ladies. Or maybe not.

My last question: Why is a network cyber-savvy enough to stream episodes over the Internet have no mention of its new fall slate on its web site, ABC.com?

Just askin'.

MONDAY:
8:00 p.m. “Wife Swap”
9:00 p.m. “The Bachelor”/”Supernanny”
10:00 p.m. “What About Brian”

TUESDAY:
8:00 p.m. “Dancing with the Stars” (new night)/”Set for the Rest of Your Life”
9 p.m. “Let’s Rob…”
9:30 p.m. “Help Me Help You”
10:00 p.m. “Boston Legal”

WEDNESDAY:
8:00 p.m. “Dancing with the Stars” (new night)/”George Lopez”/“According to Jim” (new night)
9:00 p.m. “Lost”
10:00 p.m. “The Nine”

THURSDAY:
8:00 p.m. “Big Day”
8:30 p.m. “Notes from the Underbelly”
9:00 p.m. “Grey’s Anatomy” (new night and time)
10:00 p.m. “Six Degrees”

FRIDAY:
8:00 p.m. “Betty the Ugly”
9:00 p.m. “Men in Trees”
10:00 p.m. “20/20”

SATURDAY:
8:00 p.m. “ABC Saturday Night College Football”

SUNDAY:
7:00 p.m. “America’s Funniest Home Videos”
8:00 p.m. “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition”
9:00 p.m. “Desperate Housewives”
10:00 p.m. “Brothers & Sisters”

Up tomorrow: CBS, which is expected to cancel Still Standing, Courting Alex and Out of Practice, while renewing The Unit, Close to Home and The New Adventures of Old Christine. I guess Christine star Julia Louis-Dreyfus finally put a stake in the Seinfeld curse, after all.

Tabs Eat up Britney Blunder

I can't resist posting this cover of the New York Daily News outlining Brit's continuing problems with the whole car seat thing. First, she doesn't use one, then she seats her baby facing the front of the car, which is against federal regulations until the kid is one year old.

Is thi a screed against the nosy paparazzi? Not really. I love seeing the defiantly ignorant Spears busted by these shooters (why did she have so much trouble saying "I'm pregnant" on Letterman last week? He got so confused he just had her read the Top Ten list to get through it).

But I'm confused by this statement from the cops: "We would have to witness the violation," California Highway Patrol spokesman Tom Marshall told the Daily News. "We can't issue a citation from a photograph."

So does that mean all those tickets people have gotten by mail after having their license plate photographed speeding or running red lights are null and void?

Just asking.

Network TV Crap Shoot Begins Again

In a world filled with video iPods, digital video recorders, on demand cable TV, Internet video downloads and even cellphone TV, the old school cycle of fall TV premieres feels about as dated as a Nipsy Russell joke.

Still, network TV -- a fear-based industry often shackled to bad habits because new habits might lose even more money -- is jumping into the same old waters this week, as the Big Five TV networks announce their new schedules this week for advertisers and press in New York City. (this is one of NBC's Great new Hopes, Studio 60; see below).

Among the bad signs: big name advertiser Johnson & Johnson says it will not buy network TV ads this month during the traditional "upfront" selling of commercial space. They say it's to better synchronize ad buying and other business actvities -- I'm betting they're betting all the media fragmentation will bring better rates across the networks and online later this year.

As I write this, NBC is spinning during a press conference for its new schedule, with entertainment head Kevin Reilly insisting "this has been a banner year for development at NBC." I sure hope so, because only one new NBC show has survived from last fall -- the hilarious blue collar comedy My Name Is Earl.

This time, their hopes are pinned to TWO SNL satires. One, Studio 60, was officially announced through an ad aired during the West Wing's anticlimatic series finale Sunday, created by West Wing creators Aaron sorkin and Thomas Schlamme, starring former Friend Matthew Perry, ex-West Wing-er Bradley Whitford, D.L. hughley and Daily Show correspodent Nate Corrdry (who is also in a pilot for CBS; talk about buzz!). The other, 30 Rock, is a more conventional sitcom created by Tina Fey and starring perennial SNL host Alec Baldwin. Considering that even SNL can't be funny for more than 20 minutes a week, is it wise to bet NBC's primetime future on this stuff?

One note: Reilly also hinted Dateline's To Catch a Predator series of reports may have saved the newsmagazine, which was facing cancellation rumors going into May. As it is, it's stuck on Saturdays, where they've been doing true crime stories.

What did get knocked down a peg: The Donald's Apprentice, cut to once a year and pushed off the fall schedule; Fear Factor, Conviction, Teachers, Three Wishes, E-Ring, Surface, Joey, and Apprentice: Martha Stewart all gone; Crossing Jordan and Scrubs pushed off fall; ER will share its timeslot with a new show from Crash writer/director Paul Haggis, The Black Donnellys (actually about an Irish mob family).

NBC also announced a TV 360 digital initiative which includes First Look channels for each of its network and cable properties -- NBCfirstlook.com, scififirstlook.com, etc. -- which will feature up to four episodes of shows on the Internet before they appear on conventional broadcast or cable.

There's also a broadband comedy channel dubbed Dotcomedy.com (who comes up with these names?) and the company's completed acquisition of iVillage.

And with Deal or No Deal appearing twice on the schedule, Howie Mandel has officially completed his transformation as the new Regis Philbin (!?)

Here's what's going to roll out in fall on NBC (New series in caps):

MONDAY
8-9 p.m. "Deal or No Deal"
9-10 p.m. "HEROES" -- Scientist discovers superpowered people live among us; Unbreakable-meets-X-Files.
10-11 p.m. "Medium"

TUESDAY
8-9 p.m. "FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS" - Kyle Chandler (Early Edition) in a TV version of the football-centered movie.
9-10 p.m. "KIDNAPPED" -- Jeremy Sisto ("Six Feet Under"), Delroy Lindo ("The Core"), Emmy winner Dana Delany ("China Beach"), Timothy Hutton ("Kinsey") in a serial drama about a single kidnapping; Ransom-meets-24.
10-11 p.m. "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit"

WEDNESDAY
8-9 p.m. "The Biggest Loser"
9-9:30 p.m. "20 GOOD YEARS" - John Lithgow and Jeffrey Tambor are middle-aged dudes going for it.
9:30-10 p.m. "30 ROCK" --Tina Fey, Alec Baldwin and ex-SNL-er Tracey Morgan doing what they know.
10-11 p.m. "Law & Order"

THURSDAY
8-8:30 p.m. "My Name Is Earl" (new time)
8:30-9 p.m. "The Office" (new time)
9-10 p.m. "STUDIO 60 ON THE SUNSET STRIP"
10-11 p.m. "ER"/("THE BLACK DONNELLYS" in January 2007)

FRIDAY
8-9 p.m. "Deal or No Deal"
9-10 p.m. "Las Vegas"
10-11 p.m. "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" (new day and time)

SATURDAY
8-9 p.m. "Dateline Saturday"
9-11 p.m. Drama Series Encores

SUNDAY
7-8 p.m. "FOOTBALL NIGHT IN AMERICA"
8-11 p.m. "SUNDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL"

Up tomorrow: ABC, which has reportedly canceled Sons & Daughters, picked up What About Brian and scheduled the oddball comedy Let's Rob Mick Jagger. Really.

Talk About Golden Parachutes...

When's the last time you got paid $9.3 million for the worst mistake of your career?

As my pal Richard Prince reminds us all, the San Jose Mercury News had a great story on how much loot Knight Ridder executives will earn for running their company so badly, leading shareholders forced them to sell it.

Top on the list is chairman and chief executive Tony Ridder, with $9.4-million in compensation, followed quickly by several vice presidents receiving more than $4-million each, for a total $57-million for top executives.

The phrase "failing upward" repeatedly comes to mind....

Glenn Beck Hits TV: Has Anyone Noticed?

Have you seen the new show by Glenn Beck yet?

Let's rephrase: Do you even know who Glenn Beck is?

In debuting its latest addition to CNN Headline News' burgeoning prime time lineup, the home of Nancy Grace has opted for an uncharacteristically low-key approach. Eschewing pre-show interviews and goo-gobs of publicity, they've rolled out their slick televised vehicle for conservative talker Glenn Beck in the shadows of the media -- where only his devoted fans and Grace acolytes dare to tread.

In truth, the move makes a lot of sense. TV shows almost never come together in the first episode, and many highly-hyped efforts are ravaged by brutal reviews before they barely get out of the gate (case in point: ABC's Nightline, which was eviscerated by critics but has wound up with better ratings than the show it replaced).

So Beck's under-the-radar effort this week (the show debuted at 7 p.m. Monday) unveiled a well-crafted showcase for a guy trying hard to come off as a younger, hipper Rush Limbaugh. Thursday show opened with a jokey monologue comparing the woes of American Idol evictee Chris Daughtry to the President's poll problems; Friday's show featured diatribes about the dangers of liberal college professors.

Beck's problem may be that so many other people do this stuff better. The Daily Show has cornered the market on political/media satire, Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs gin up traditionalist moral outrage better than anyone in television and MSNBC's Keith Olbermann has honed his brand of smart and snarky television to a fine knifepoint.

Whether the topic is immigration reform or a hokey pledge college students can take to resist brainwashing by liberal professors, Beck's stuff is vaguely unsatisfying -- not quite funny enough and not quite serious enough to make a dent. But seeing him in action, with open-necked shirts, pulled down ties and a regular guy attitude, I understand now why CNN brought him on as the caffienated male counterpart to Grace's super-righteous, soccer mom-scaring theatrics.

Tampa Bay area radio fans will remember Beck from his stint at local talk radio outlet WFLA-970 AM, where he developed his new school Rushbo shtick before heading to Philadelphia and national success. He weathers the transition to TV well, stumbling only a little while working his everyguy routine for a succession of mostly-male, nearly all white guests.

Beck can be an engaging presence -- his final commentary Friday was a heartfelt plea for people to call their mothers on Sunday, set against the loss of his own mother at a young age. But it still mostly adds up to another gassy showcase for starkly conservative views coated with a veneer of showbiz...just what cable TV needs.

Living With Cancer on the Radio, Impressively

Longtime blog readers might remember my posts on former Nightline executive producer Leroy Sievers, who was ousted from his job and wound up joining several charitable organizations in Africa and even helping with post-Katrina relief.

Sievers has since been diagnosed with cancer and has offered vivid, heartrending accounts of his travails on National Public Radio. Hear an early one here, and his latest one on the illogic of chemotherapy is here, beginning with the awesome line, "My doctors are trying to kill me...they're trying to destroy my body, in order to save it."

He admits secretly hating friends who have been able to go on with their lives, while he is stuck in the suffering identity of cancer patient. It's a moving window into a world most of us will never want to experince firsthand.

Short Takes: Snow, Arianna, Fergie...

I'm watching Condoleezza Rice begin a round-robin of morning talk shows to answer questions about the letter from Iran and the struggle to contain that country's nuclear ambitions. And I'm struck by the game effort to get ahead of the news cycle and affect media dialogue on the issue.

On Monday, National Security Advisor Steven Hadley made the same morning show go-round, confirming the nomination of Gen. Michael Hayden as new CIA head before the president would formally announce it -- countering criticisms from prominent Republicans which had percolated in the media over the weekend.

Both moves seem unusual for a White House that has often chosen to media sniping over emerging issues rather than address it -- and one can't help wondering if this is one of the first signs of new press secretary Tony Snow at work.

If so, he may be teaching the Bush administration something old journalists have known for years -- many times, you get more out of making nice with the press than picking fights.

HuffPost Turns One Year Old

Arianna Huffington's collections of blogs turned one years old yesterday, and I couldn't resist pulling together a story about how its success has defied some traditional expectations about the blogosphere. It seems clear that she and some other "A-list" bloggers are punching up to affect the news cycle and bring new voices to the nation's political debate.

Some have also become profitable businesses, turning the top tier blogosphere from a field of sites for individuals posting columns in their spare time to organized, group efforts. It will be interesting to see where this new form goes -- and where it takes the national debate.

Craig Feguson Is God

I thought I was a little odd. It was a habit I couldn't really admit in polite company.

Then Denis Leary popped up on CBS' Late, Late Show last night and admitted to host Craig Ferguson that he has taped the Scottish comic's rambling, raucous monologues for a while -- transfixed by the skill of a guy who can entertain an audience for 10 minutes straight while looking like he's telling a story off the cuff.

Finally, I can let my own freak flag fly about Ferguson, whose quirky monologues I've been taping for weeks. And like Leary, I think he's the best monologist on TV; one of late night television's best-kept secrets.

Before taking over CBS' floundering 12:30 a.m. chat show from the insufferable Craig Kilborn, Ferguson was best known for playing Drew Carey's clueless boss on his ABC sitcom. When he was hired on after a succession of guest hosts, it seemed like a desperation move barely guaranteed to delay cancellation.

But then Ferguson took over. His trademark phrase "It's a great day for America, everybody," always prefaces a passionate, offhand lengthy monologue about whatever's on his mind that day -- from his sketchy relationship with his recently deceased father, to why he's got a chip on his shoulder about stuntman/magician David Blaine (doesn't everybody?).

He's a novelist, well-known comic in Britain, and has even written and sung the show's theme song.

One fave monologue line, delivered during a diatribe about a local Starbucks which has no bathroom, was captured by Wikipedia thusly: "How can you sell a diuretic beverage and not have a bathroom?"

Delivered with knowing irony through Ferguson's thick Scottish brogue, it's a high-wire comedy act that always delivers the funny. Check it out yourself -- set the TiVo if you can't stay up that long. Believe me, its worth a few fewer hours of naptime.

Does Local Media Cover DUIs Too Much?

Among the questions raised by Tampa Tribune editor Janet Weaver's recent arrest on suspicion of Driving Under the Influence -- including whether she will keep her job -- is one many talented journalists have asked me.

Should local media cover DUI arrests so prominently?

The list of local journalism figures who have been pinched on this charge is long: WTSP anchor Reginald Roundtree (who insisted he was not impaired and pled guilty to a reckless driving charge), radio personality Nancy Alexander, now-deceased WFLA sports director Chris Thomas, Times sports writer Rick Stroud and outgoing Times TV critic Chase Squires to name a few.

The tradition of prominently covering DUI arrests of Times staffers dates back many years to the time former editor Eugene Patterson demanded his DUI arrest run on the front page. With that legacy, we have often aggressively covered the arrests of prominent local citizens and Times staffers, though not often on the front page.

I was surprised to note, while telling friends at a seminar at the Poynter Institute about this coverage pattern last year, that many prominent journalists there questioned why we covered DUI arrests at all -- saying such arrests were too common. Others suggested the arrest might be noted in a short story a few paragraphs long, with a longer story published if the person is convicted.

There seems to be a difference of opinion even among public comments on the Tampa Tribune's web site, with some arguing that the seriousness of drunk driving warrants the attention. I worry that the current hysteria surrounding many journalists' mistakes may unduly curb or crumple promising careers -- leading us to drum some people out of the profession without fully considering the circumstances.

What do you think? Have local media gone DUI crazy? Or, in a world where drunk driving arrests of actors in Hawaii can garner worldwide headlines, are we just doing our jobs?

LOST Producers: DUI Did Not Bring Death

Producers on ABC's hit series Lost insist that their move to cap actresses Michelle Rodriguez and Cynthia Watros in last week's episode had nothing to do with the women's arrest for DUI last year.

Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse told TVGuide.com that Rodriguez came to the show insisting her Ana Lucia character last just one year (though she seemed to waver in that conviction after a few months on the Lost success train). Watros' character may not be dead, though she was shot twice in the abdomen in last week's episode.

I just hope Evangeline Lilly has a driver standing by...

The View Loses Another Diva

Gleeful anticipation of actual on-air combat between newly hired co-host Rosie O'Donnell and her longtime nemesis Star Jones have faded following renewed rumors that Jones will be ousted from the show -- and a separate rumor that her replacement might be Oprah's gal pal Gayle King.

My question: Will ABC/Disney let King spend 20 minutes talking about her pal Oprah? And if not, will she have anything else to say?

Stories I'm Sick Of Already

The Bush administration is about to bring the military and civilian intelligence together by hiring a former general to run the CIA.

The Justice Department is trying to force journalists to reveal who leaked information about the grand jury testimony involving the BALCO steroid scandal, further eroding the press' ability to report on controversial issues.

And recent circulation figures released for the first six months of 2006 by the Audit Bureau of Circulations shows newspapers continuing to slide in paid subscribers, with the San Francisco Chronicle down 15 percent, the Boston Globe down 8 percent, the Orlando Sentinel down 8 percent and the St. Petersburg Times down 4 percent.

But what do many columnists and media watchers want to talk about? Why there weren't more stories about Comedy Central's Steven Colbert.

I get it. The lack of early stories on his cutting routine at the White House Correspondents' Dinner showed how cozy the press corps is with the Bushies and these minions of the Beltway establishment are so self-important they can't take a joke.

Nonsense. Didn't the nation's major newspapers just win Pulitzers for exposing the Jack Abramoff scandal, the CIA secret prison scandal and the NSA spying scandal? Aren't they filled with stories of Bush's waning poll numbers and management miscues? Haven't journalists apologized enough for dropping the ball in the run up to the Iraq War?

For those who want to see conspiracies everywhere, the lack of Colbert coverage can seem a smoking gun. But it sees to me that there was a genuine lack of consensus on whether the guy was funny or insulting, while the president turned out to be funny while making fun of himself.

The controversy over Colbert coverage reminds me of the other overblown issue from last week: the Spanish-language Star Spangled Banner. Turns out, the State Department features several Spanish translations of the banner on its Web site and President Bush reportedly had Spanish versions of the banner and America the Beautiful played at past campaign events.

So Spanish language versions of hallowed American songs were okay until illegal immigrants started protesting?

Frankly, I'm more appalled that more news outlets didn't pay more attention to Donald Rumsfeld's dissembling last week when challenged on statements he made in the run up to war. A former CIA analyst with his own history of saying odd things publicly, reminded Rumsfeld that he claimed to specifically know where Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were before the war -- CNN was one of the few news outlets I saw that bothered to confirm that the analyst was correct and Rumsfeld was being disingenuous.

I guess oversight is in the eye of the beholder.

Another Friend Down

Couldn't let the day pass without noting the resignation of a friend, #tbt arts columnist and former music critic Gina Vivinetto.

According to our story today, Gina admitted posting several messages to a fake MySpace page mocking Hillsborough County commissioner Ronda Storms. Our executive editor felt the posts irrevocably compromised her integrity as a journalist; Gina resigned.

I don't feel comfortable indulging the usual spouting off that I commit in this space. I helped Gina a lot when she replaced me as pop music critic and I've always loved her writing and her personality -- seeing her blossom as a writer here was a wonderful thing. But, given Storms' controversial public profile and her constant sniping with the press, unflattering comments written by a Times journalist couldn't have surfaced at worse time.

Still, in a year that has seen one journalist friend fired for plagiarism and a yet another reporter friend die suddenly of an unknown medical condition, it's another tough loss.

Good luck, Gina.

CBS Jumps Into Broadband with Innertube

CBS has jumped headfirst into the broadband universe with innertube -- an ad-supported site filled with new and repurposed programming the network imagines will be a destination for video-hungry websurfers.

Gotta say, my first reaction is: not so impressed. Though the press release promises footage of Pearl Jam's recent webcast concert on Late Show With David Letterman, innertube's current offerings feature a lame-o makeover show for college kids called Geek to Chic and snippets from interviews with CBS stars likely featured on its promotional DVDs.

I know, the site started today. So criticism is way premature. CBS is promising original content such as an animated show based on stories celebs tell about their everyday lives a scripted sketch comedy show and be