WATCH OUT FOR THAT Wii!!

One day, it will happen.

I will place the following phone call:

"Hey, good morning Captain, it's Jeff. I can't make it into work today, and actually might miss the next two weeks....

What's that? Yes, I said two weeks. It's a funny story really. I'm at Centra Southside Community Hospital...

No, no, I'm okay. Now. But I'll be in a neck brace for a while and I've lost all feeling in the right side of my body.
...
Car accident? Ah..no. Assault and battery? Hmm, not quite. Home invasion? That's pretty close.
...
Actually, like I said it's funny. I was playing Wii, and trying to nail a 100 on Bird's-Eye Bulls-Eye, did you ever play that game? Anyway, my feet got all sweaty and I was flapping my arms like crazy so I slipped off the balance board, smacked my head on our fireplace and caused our plasma TV to land on my head. My head actually went through the TV, it was pretty intense.
...
Yeah, I know. Think our health plan covers that?...I didn't think so. I'm in room 325. Bring ice and a lawyer if you visit. I'm suing the crap out of Nintendo."

You laugh (or at least scoff, I hope), but it's not far from the truth.

Apparently, the Wii is trouble.

Look at this 14-year-old girl's foot. She fractured the base of the fifth metatarsal after playing Wii for five straight hours and falling off the balance board. Nice. Don't believe me, it's in the New England Journal of Medicine as more and more clinicians are seeing patients for 'Wiiitis.'

Watch the video for some of the Wii Fit Plus training games and you'll see why. The games are amazing and fun...if you are coordinated and sober.

Don't think it's serious?

Check this out. People are falling of the balance boards, dislocating shoulders, getting 'Wii-knee,' having resulting corrective surgery and worse. As the article notes, 'traumatic hemothorax' occurs when cavities around a person's lungs fill with blood after a hard fall. Wii-related cases have been document. Try to picture THAT living room scene.

The Wii is friggin' potentially fatal. No, really. A 25-year-old Britain collapsed while jogging during a WiiFit run. Not the Wii's fault, but, I'm just saying...

For those average folks out there, the Wii can be more harmful than tackle football or reporting at the bottom of a snowy hill. [Seriously, go back and click...it's worth it.]

[Still with me? Good.]

Each one of these Wiis should come with a 'Wii-ll & Testament.' And you'd best be ready to get a new TV, furniture, light fixings and/or significant other.

Don't believe me again?

Check out this montage.

Or this one.

Or this one. (My favorite thanks to the Weezer tune. Go the 1:26 mark as the lass destroys a lightbulb. I've come close roughly three dozen times.)

Personally, I'm one 'Grand Slam Tennis' awkward serve away from a tourniquet.

*SIDENOTE: Why would anyone allow a camera to be present and or recording in a room while you are on this thing? Check out Grandpa here. You think anyone is going to be talking about his accomplishments or community service at his wake?

Hell no, they'll be talking about the time he nearly squashed a grandson playing 'Super Hula Hoop.'

And this is me in 30 years. This guy thinks Wii Sports Bowling is 'off' and gets a little furious. He's a new hero of mine.*

While the InterWeb community has also turned the WiiFit into the next, how do I say, 'adult' phenomenon, there's no doubt the Wii's real power is simple.

It makes coordinated, balanced and athletic people look absolutely ridiculous. And it makes uncoordinated, unbalanced and unathletic people look like brain-crazed, hip-flailing zombies.

And the whole concept of it says quite a bit about its users. The linked parody video nails it.

"Don't want to invest $3.19 in a hula hoop? Why not pick up a Wii for $300 and enjoy the same fun in the comfort of your living room, without that annoying plastic hoop."

I can't personally hold too much against WiiFit Plus. It's actually helped me quite a bit.

Since hopping on it for the first time on 1/14, I've dropped over 9.5 pounds.

How you ask?

Well, when I first did the 'Body Test,' my Mii avatar swelled to the size of a Zeppelin. (See inserted picture for reenactment, sans T-shirt and Guinness pajama pants. If I ever had an action figure made of me, it would wear those pants.)

When a dude in that kind of shape hops on the board, the cute, high-pitched WiiFit voice disdainfully says two very painful words.

"That's obese."

The tone of the voice is matter-of-fact and sounds quite, well, disappointed.

Congratulations WiiFit creators, you sucked me in from that point forward. I've been irked to the point of consistent physical activity.

Come hell or high water, by the end of 2010, I will be borderline 'Normal' by the game's Body Mass Index standards. That means I'll have to drop 25+ pounds this year, but I am doing it. I'm already nearly halfway there.

Why am I so motivated?

Is it because I wake up at night with the words, "That's obese," ringing in my ears and think about my Mii shaking his head in disgust and shame?
Is it because the game actually REBUKES you for missing workouts, tests or goals?
Is it because I want to get to 'Normal' and immediately grab the balance board, run outside, place it in front of my car and give it a real Balance Test?

The answer to all of these is an emphatic, "Yes."

And apparently I'm not the only one taking frustration out on the Wii.

This guy shoots one. (It's clear it also called him 'Obese.') And these guys dressed up as two Nintendo legends to smash theirs.

When I do get to 'Normal' stage, and I will, I will have the good people at Nintendo to thank. The WiiFit Plus' constant mockery of my physical conditioning is enough to drive me insane.

Insane enough to lose the weight I've been packing on for the past 14 years since I graduated from high school slim and trim (and dumb). The stack of 'clothes I once wore' will diminish. And it's all thanks to Nintendo.

Of course, I'm happy to credit Nintendo now.

But, if you ever come to visit me in room 325 at Southside Hospital, bring that ice I was talking about. But, right before you enter the room, call this guy because I want a chunk of that Nintendo coin.

And, oh yeah, before we go to trial, make sure you delete this blog post for me.

"Bold & Fresh Tour"? Try 'Bought & Sold'

The folks over at Fox News are smart. Real smart.

When you've got a good thing going, and they do, you ride it out. In blackjack, any Swingers fan knows you always double down on 11, and in media, you always package your best sellers.

Hence, the 'Bold & Fresh Tour' featuring Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck. These titans of conservative talk take to a stage separately, and then together, to give their takes on the state of the nation. To see a clip, go here. [Click on the 'Fox News' tab in the video player and select the clip called 'Glenn and Bill."]

The 'high energy' ad (lots of music, sound effects, graphics) promises that the duo will provide some comedy, needle each other by questioning their respective statuses in news and then angrily lace into government as they do on their shows.

Original content? Not so much. A chance to see two of the most popular talking heads in person? Bingo. A nice money generator and a way to continue Fox's aggressive 'grass roots' approach to media.

In truth, it's simple.

All media outlets across the country are working desperately to become vital to a local audience. Why watch local TV news when you can watch network/cable nightly news? Well, because only the local station is on your block; you can see them at WalMart. So, as a network, Fox is working to address that issue by creating a viewer community. And, they are using their best and most controversial hosts to drive the campaign.

In more truth, it's brilliant. But, people need to see this tour as what it is.

This sort of traveling rhetorical circus won't clear up the murky swamp of political dialogue. It won't serve to enlighten the minds of supporters or detractors. These 'great minds' of media aren't going to advance our understanding of government infrastructure.

The tour is about selling books, hats, T-shirts, tote bages, travel mugs and tickets. The cheapest tickets, from what I found on ticketmaster.com, sell for $132.50 each for the upcoming event in Florida. Night in and night out, all Beck and O'Reilly discuss is how poor this country is becoming and how our elected leaders are working to suck dollars out of our wallets.

But, if your dollars are going into their wallets...well, that's just fine.

Contradicting themselves is nothing new to Beck or O'Reilly.

Beck's shtick has been to ire the frustrated voting masses and to convince us to take to the streets. His shows are predictable; he uses remotely-linked historical references and quotations to draw comparisons between President Obama and Karl Marx/Stalin/Hitler. He scares you, settles you down and then works to inspire you into immediate action.

Glenn Beck tells you to invest in gold because it's good for all of us. And, coincidentally, good for him...since he is a paid spokesperson for goldline.com. The Daily Show pointed this out last year.

Beck claims that America's health care system doesn't need to be overhauled, just a few months after blasting the same system when he was being paid by CNN. Once again, The Daily Show took the time to outline Beck's 'transgressions' when the man himself wouldn't admit his convenient change of mind.

But Beck's greatest gift to conservatives has been his ability to motivate voters into visible action as part of Fox News' movement to create community among both voters and, more importantly, viewers.

The '912 Project' helped give the now infamous tea baggers an organized way to voice their issues. That could have been a positive thing for the country, except that many instead used it as a forum to showcase misunderstanding and ignorance. The signs at some of these rallies were frighteningly pathetic.

There is just one such 'tea party sign collage' in this blog to serve as an example of just how uneducated and truly scared some of our fellow citizens have become. Referring to our president as 'Osama,' claiming the arrival of white slavery and saying that we are simply a Christian nation, all others aren't welcome, etc.

Beck is working hard to promote his latest rally, one set for August on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. The event will raise funds for an excellent cause but, make no mistake, it's also about Beck. After all, it's guaranteed that attendees will chant two things: "USA!" and "GLENN BECK!"...maybe not in that order.

Democratic/liberal hosts go berserk over footage of those tea party rallies while Fox News proudly puffs out their chests as they clamor over each other, praising themselves for reigniting the flame of liberty for modern Americans.

It's not hard to recall when a disoriented and frustrated public showed similar anger at then President George W. Bush. People hanging him in effigy at rallies or making threats to kill him on sight. The same kind of hate and vile behavior found at some tea parties.

Not every tea bagger or liberal-thinking protest participant acts in such a way, but there are enough to make us all nervous.

They sure made O'Reilly nervous six years ago. Okay, maybe not nervous, but certainly upset.

O'Reilly really made his inroads into cable ratings out of those rallies. His shows were intense, his gaze fierce and his words piercing. Words like 'unAmerican' or 'socialist,' or 'communist.' He got in the face of military generals, journalists from all over the world, and famously was very hostile to the son of a 9/11 victim.

Jeremy Glick's stand on that show is memorable to say the least. O'Reilly tells the kid to 'Shut Up' so that O'REILLY can respect Glick's father...incredible television. I can only imagine what Glick's father might have thought. I assume it would be, "Respect me by respecting the son I loved and raised." Even hardened 'No Spin' fans have trouble supporting O'Reilly's actions with Glick.

Both Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly have made their names by being 'out there' on the political right. Their job is not easy, but the premise is. Get ratings, make us money, remain relevant at all times, incite viewer passion, and please don't forget to say 'Fox News.'

It's working. FNC just had their best year ever as 47% of primetime cable news viewers watch Fox. They are crushing CNN, MSNBC and Headline News. It's not even a contest.

And what do you do when you're winning big? You push a hunk of chips into the middle of the table. You work to take every last dime from everyone in the room. That is what the 'Bold and Fresh Tour' is. A marketing ploy meant to sell books and promote two of the richest media figures on the planet. No one involved needs your money. They just want it. Every dime you are willing to play/pay.

These two are frankly the best at what they do. But this latest marketing move shows exactly what Fox thinks about its largest group of viewers.

And Fox does not think much of its viewers.

They don't believe viewers want real, unfiltered news. Their ratings have proven that. This started back in the '80s with The Simpsons and Married With Children. Fox used to aim for the 'lowest common denominator' viewer. Less educated, poor and crude. It worked on me.

As far as news is concerned, Fox believes viewers want faces...faces that yell, alarm the public and can then immediately spin a good joke on another's behalf.

Like all businesses, Fox is selling a product. It just so happens that their product in this case is a pair of men whose rhetoric causes unhealthy distrust and paranoia. The nature of their business allows them to be held unaccountable for their words and actions. Each night you tune in it's a fresh new show, the insults hurled the previous night are either forgotten or retraced with greater vitriol.

And no, Keith Olbermann is no better.

For those of you who plan to attend one of the Beck/O'Reilly tour stops, ask yourself these quick questions:

"Am I really a better citizen by financing this approach to news?"
"Do I truly support every belief these men espouse?"
"Do I have something to gain mentally or spiritually by attending this event?"

If you answer 'Yes,' to any of these questions, then feel free to buy your tickets. Give them your money.

I just hope that when they yell, they don't spit at your $130+ seat on accident. Because if they do, they certainly won't notice.

They won't notice because they are used to it. What's it to them?

After all, every single night, Beck and O'Reilly purposefully spit on millions of Americans.

Dear NFL, Do SOMEthing With the Pro Bowl

I can't think of a single professional 'all-star' GAME that I actually like.

I love the NHL Skills Competition when good players are in it; last year's was fun.

The NBA Slam Dunk Contest is great, though too long and their 3-Point Shootout is watchable when it has recognizable contestants/winners.

The MLB All-Star Game is generally awful, despite the league's best efforts to give it relevance. The Home Run Derby is something to see, but only when a guy catches fire and starts destroying baseballs, such as Josh Hamilton in 2008. The dude hit 28 dingers in the first round...and lost.

In general, the all-star games themselves are glorified exhibitions and make for poor viewing.

But, far and away the worst pro all-star game is the Pro Bowl. The NFL is the country's most powerful sport...incredible ratings, nationwide fanbases, round-the-clock coverage, etc. Yet their all-star product is far and away the worst among all pro sports.

Watching the Pro Bowl is akin to paying for a movie that you really don't want to see. You watch it because your friends want to see it, your fears are immediately met in the first two minutes, and you are forced to sit in utter anguish until its over. Bad vibes going in, bad experience all around. I can't name a single person I know that actually watches it.

I'm a huge Steelers fan...I have the ugly ties, uncouth home decor and annoying license plates to prove it. So when I heard Ben Roethlisberger chose to skip this year's Pro Bowl, I was disappointed. Big Ben says he's sitting out to help heal his shoulder, but that's not the whole story. He's already been to it once, and that experience was probably enough. When asked about Roethlisberger's status, his own coach said nothing was really wrong.

And in truth, Ben is right. Why should he go? The game is boring, it has no 'stick' among players/coaches (no one cares), the hassle of travel is unnecessary and there's no real incentive. These guys make so much money, the bonus isn't worth it.

Get selected and then get out, that's what the stars do. They don't even attend the game after stepping out. They collectively thumb their nose at it every year...it's a joke.

Here are some of the other players who have declined their invitations this year:
Tom Brady, Larry Fitzgerald, Randy Moss, Stephen Jackson, Jake Long, Lance Briggs, Andre Gurode, Charles Woodson, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie and Wes Welker.

Welker and Rodgers-Cromartie have nasty injuries that would keep them off the field even if they wanted to play. But, the majority of the other injured players were all more than willing to suit up for a game they cared about, a game that mattered. The Pro Bowl doesn't matter and no one cares, therefore, they see no reason to play in it.

Imagine Moss & Brady talking it over last week after PLAYING the Ravens:

TB - "Dude, you going to the Pro Bowl?"

RM - "What?!?" (Incredulous look) "LAME! You?"

TB - "Not unless you go too, I don't want to do all of that."

RM - "No way man, I'm going to go see 'Edge of Darkness' that day. Big plans, don't want to break them, you know. But Ochocinco will go for me, he loves that crap."

As fans, it's an insult. Why would anyone pay over $100 to watch a bunch of alternates play a few snaps and sit down? The players laugh the whole time, tackle half-heartedly, yuck it up for the cameras, do sideline interviews...on-air garbage.

For kicks, I just visited Ticketmaster's Pro Bowl site and could have bought a ticket at the 20-yard line for $130 right this minute. The game is in 10 days! The fact the tickets are available and cheap is a clear sign that NO ONE is interested.

Check out this pic from the stands last year.

Aloha Stadium, the traditional and now former home of the NFL's annual dog & pony show, seats 50,000, but, despite the game's location and the league's prestige, it was never a good game environment. Empty seats abound, the crowd noise is low. Awful.

This year's game will be at Sun Life (formerly Dolphins) Stadium in Miami, with a football seating capacity of 75,540. And, ten days before the game, individual seats on the 20-yard line are going for $130. Can't wait. That stadium's lower level will fill up...after ushers say, 'Screw it,' five minutes in and let people sit in the first deck.

I understand why the NFL needs this. It's closure to the season for any fan whose team is not in the Super Bowl, but when the league's stars aren't interested, it needs to be revamped. The NFL did the right thing by placing it before the Super Bowl, at least our interest will be somewhat piqued. But, that eliminates some of the best players...a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.

The NFL also plans on bouncing the Pro Bowl from town to town each year, hoping to cash in on markets/fans excited to host it. With this year's game being in Miami, you would think a few Dolphins would be there to help draw local interest. Nope. Jake Long was the only local selection, and he's out due to injury. Nice move. It's important to note the tickets are available to Miami season ticket holders, which I'll admit would be a nice 'bonus' at the end of the year.

However, it's too little, too late.

The fans have spoken. We're not interested. For whatever reason, the Pro Bowl doesn't click. Really, of all the major pro all-star events, only the NBA's Slam Dunk Contest resonates...all of the actual all-star games struggle to bring in a good audience. The MLB game gets a few casual viewers because of their asinine decision to link the game's winner to home-field advantage in the World Series. That almost makes it interesting...but not really.

I propose that we drop the traditional all-star games all together or find a way to incorporate skills challenges into the game somehow...make it fun, mix it up. Who cares, no one is watching anyway.

Bring back the NFL Quarterback Challenge and the Pro Bowl Skills Challenge. The reason the NFL QB Challenge got canned was because Mike Vick was prominently featured in the 2007 version, then he got busted...rather than edit him out in time, they dropped it. Nice.

These challenges are kind of fun, and holding them at halftime would give non-starters and specially selected players (snubs) a chance to enjoy the game as well. Hell, an EA Sports Madden Challenge for players would be great. They already host one anyway and the players take it very seriously. You could do this as the pre/postgame show...would be awesome. Grant you, it would have to be heavily censored for language, but hey, it'd be a great pay-per-view event!

Dear NFL, do SOMEthing with the Pro Bowl.

Otherwise you'll see more athletes passing up the chance to shine as an all-star for the opportunity to rest and relax. All they are doing is diminishing the all-pro legacy while ignoring the game of football, and the fans, that made them rich.

Mark 'The Liar' McGwire Has No Place In Baseball

Time for a lightning-quick take on the 'stunning announcement' that Mark McGwire juiced for nearly a decade while crushing bombs in the majors.

It's important to note that sports fanatics and critics are likely on one side of the fence on the steroids issue. You are either completely against using steroids and find the act a crime against baseball. Or, your take is that it's too difficult to determine what effect Performance Enhancing Drugs (PEDs) may have had and, therefore, though it's unfortunate, the game is bigger than the sin.

The folks on the latter side of the fence are wrong.

I've blogged about steroids before, regarding a player very close to my heart. But McGwire's admission brought me back to the issue.

For those of you willing to take McGwire's apology, watch this interview with ESPN's investigative reporter T.J. Quinn. Did you listen to it?

McGwire claims taking steroids didn't lead to a single home run. You can't hit homers if you don't play in the game and take at-bats. McGwire said he took the drugs to get onto the field and...take at-bats. Therefore he is lying or in denial.

McGwire's career batting average was .263. Though that's respectable, the guys on the all-time homer leader list with him have generally better numbers. A-Rod (ANOTHER admitted user) is right behind Big Mac on the list, soon to pass him, but his career average is over .300. Frank Robinson (just ahead of McGwire) batted .294. Barry Bonds, MLB's tainted home run king, batted .298.

What does all that mean?

That McGwire was a pop-or-flop hitter. The ultimate fence-swinger.

He had over double the number of homers than he did doubles, 583 to 252, and he struck out more than he walked, 1596 to 1317. That final stat means less and less in today's playing era, but it still shows that he was by no means a patient or incredibly talented hitter.

He doesn't deserve the Hall of Fame...he never really did.

Did he help save baseball in the late 90s? That's arguable. He captured our attention and his feats impressed us. I was there watching every swing. But it didn't feel right then and it feels a lot worse now. To think that we idolized Big Mac and Sosa...two of the worst cheaters in the league's history...it's sad. I'm embarrassed.

And McGwire should be too. I find it unbelievable that a team, an owner and a group of players would find it acceptable to have him stand as their hitting coach.

He didn't do it on talent and work ethic alone. He cheated.

Aren't we taught that cheaters never prosper...that they don't win?

Some fans and reporters may choose to remember the following Mark McGwire:

But I choose to remember THIS Mark McGwire:
The one that lied to our nation's elected leaders and to all of us. The one that evaded the truth...until he wanted to get back into baseball and was FORCED to admit his wrongdoing. Commissioner Bud Selig said McGwire needed to do this to ease his transition back into the game. How sad.

The game, the St. Louis Cardinals and the Hall of Fame don't need him.

In my opinion, they never did.

No More Late Nights: I'm Tuning Out

*Yep, I'm trying to get back to blogging again...once, maybe twice a week. Quick posts, no more 3,000+ word novellas. Too much time and I can't stay on top of them. (Obviously, since it's been over half a year. I'm embarrassed.) Now, let's get to it...*

Friends, NBC is about to kill late night television.

The ridiculous notion of returning Jay Leno to 11:35p.m., moving Conan to 12:05a.m. and pushing Jimmy Fallon to 1:05a.m. will only help solidify Letterman's recent ratings boost. And, when that fades (probably by first quarter 2011) we will see late night TV take a nosedive. Forever.


I can only imagine CBS execs calling each other like giddy pre-teens: "Did you hear? They pushed Jay back to the Tonight time and smacked Conan to 12:05! OMG! That's stupid, right?!? That's so stupid!...I know, right!...Ha ha, what?...Oh, who cares if Dave and Craig are awful, we're going to make a killing!"

It's clear that the best TV comedy went to cable a long time ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Conan, or even Fallon, follows suit. Conan better if he wants to stay relevant.

It wasn't always like this...these guys used to be incredible...

Growing up, staying up late was cool. It was the coolest. Cooler than Reebok pumps, slap-on wristbands or NKOTB. (If that acronym doesn't ring a bell, imagine the Jonas Brothers/Hanson and Justin Timberlake all rolled into an awkward tween-girl megacraze...that about sums up their impact on girls in my middle school.)

I always wondered what my parents watched on TV when we went to sleep. It HAD to have been awesome...that was my thought process. Of course now I realize that my Dad was writing checks and my Mom was falling asleep on the couch, but back then it seemed like they had the potential to witness amazing things first-hand during the night, while I jealously tried to avoid thinking about schoolwork.

At school, the 'cool' kids (the ones whose parents I would later discover were lazy) used to talk about how funny stuff on TV was late at night. The coolest kids would all retell SNL jokes on Monday and Tuesday. I didn't even know what they were talking about. I saw my first SNL show when I was 17. Ultra-lamo, that's me.

But, far and away the coolest thing about watching TV that late at night was Carson/Leno or Letterman. I don't think the younger generations today could understand their full effect on comedy during that time. Even though TV viewing options were expanding, they still defined 'funny.' They were monsters for the networks and ate up the ratings books. Every comic looked to them to try and get an edge. They drove America's comedy shortbus.

When I finally got 'hip,' I would watch them whenever I could and I would bounce between Leno and Letterman. Honestly, neither of them ever related to me, but I respected what they did and occasionally they were side-splittingly good. But throughout the last few years, the one guy that I could sit and watch night in and night out was Conan O'Brien.

I still remember his first few shows. He was really awkward and his timing, well, it took time. But when he nailed it, he was something to watch. Our college dorm lobbies were packed every night with students fighting over the 'huge' 24-inch TVs...we would fight over Leno/Letterman, but everyone agreed Conan was the best. And he earned his shot at the Tonight Show...

Which makes the current farce at NBC too much to take.

I can't imagine trying to buoy the guys' egos while fretting over a ratings disaster, but to say NBC is mismanaging their late night schedule is akin to saying that Gilbert Arenas may need to take an online course on gun safety.

Up until the past few months I was a guy who would stay up late and surf the late night shows, just as I did as a college kid, to see the guests...try to catch a Conan skit. But not one of these media giants and their staffs could figure out how to stay viable and fresh. Some of Jimmy Kimmel's stuff is great, but it happens so rarely than watching online is a better use of your time. The best stuff Fallon's show ever did was in the webisodes leading up to the show's debut.

And that makes me realize that late night TV is going to fall hard. Letterman's shtick doesn't appeal to the Millenials and Conan is grasping at straws. It may take a few years to get there, but I get the impression that Dave is just trying to wait out Leno. Once Jay fizzes out, Letterman will throw some more barbs at NBC for passing on him and he'll just up and quit. I think he'll do it abruptly, much as he handled his office sex scandal. But, he'll likely go out on his own terms, which is something Jay can not say.

Conan gets the raw deal, but he didn't carry the ratings...he had an incredible run, but he missed his chance. Time and comedy seem to have passed him by, which his shocking given how connected and strong he was just a few short years ago. 'In the Year 2000' and 'Photo Gallery' were must-watch skits that kept you tuned in every night, but Conan's creativity is gone.

NBC isn't doing anyone any favors, except CBS of course. They've abused the Jay/Conan fan bases enough...moving time slots, making their problems public, etc. Those insulted viewers are going to go elsewhere...and I'm starting right now.

I pledge to never watch another live late night show of this ilk ever again. If you haven't been paying attention, funnyordie.com, collegehumor.com and The Onion are reinventing funny online. And, there's no TV-ratings/language filter...some of it is nasty, but by God most of it is funny.

They're fresh, they're occasionally insightful (okay, very occasionally) and they're hilarious. And, they aren't embarrassing themselves nightly.

Hey, late night! You are dead to me.

I'm going online.

Now, who's coming with me?

Another One Bites The Digi Dust & The State of Media

The Ann Arbor News is the latest daily to take the plunge. After 174 years of doing business, the AAN will become AnnArbor.com, publishing web stories while still cranking out two print editions per week.

This really isn't news in Ann Arbor as the paper announced the decision in March. However, today's edition will be their last daily. Imagine being Geoff Larcom and having to write about it.

Revenues/profits are down and costs are up. And, after taking wallops to their wallets for several years now, dailies are essentially surrendering to the digital age.

We as media consumers have had it so good for so long that our expectations for 'free' online news have all but destroyed the metro daily. And folks like those at newspaperdeathwatch.com are watching intently.

The Rocky Mountain News. The Seattle Post Intelligencer. The Cincinnati Post...the list keeps growing. And, the guys/gals at The Onion (who I've been reading for over a decade now) have been having their laughs as well. And, as the folks at newspaperdeathwatch.com pointed out, The Onion's new video packages are dead-on. They have mastered the art of crafting media cliches and the ridiculously over-the-top way media tend to attack stories. This clip is classic. My favorite is 'Expert In a Suit.'

Video nearly killed the radio star, but the Internet is massacring print.

We can't underestimate television news' troubling role in this problem. As the late great Walter Cronkite was always so quick to note, the evening news and cable news programs currently dominating the industry have succumbed to the popularity of commentary. Unbiased reporting is slowly dying in the broadcast medium as most of the highest-rated news programs are based on 'infotainment.' I first heard that term on The Simpsons and laughed...no one is laughing anymore.

We as consumers have fallen for it. Watching the news can be 'boring' and 'hard,' but watching Bill O'Reilly bash Democrats and pausing to watch a TIVO'd Keith Olbermann rip Republicans is much more fun. While the shows are entertaining, their rhetoric is biased and at times hateful. The new stories are second-class citizens, afterthoughts to the personalities driving the ratings. I'm at the point where I can't watch any of it.

More and more media consumers are going to the web because we don't have to sit through commercials or listen to people vapidly insult each other. The place to deviate from that coverage used to be a good paper...when we were sick of watching poorly constructed or loosely written TV news, we could sift through our fishwraps and make our own decisions.

But, print is dying a very slow and agonizing death. It won't last in its current state. More dailies are going to focus on web content while publishing limited print editions just to survive. In our 'must have it now' age of news, journalists have to turn to Twitter and other web marketing/media tools to get there first. And the quality of coverage is suffering.

Yesterday's battle over video of Jordan Crawford's dunk over Lebron James was another example of how newspapers can't compete in today's media industry. TMZ originally planned to launch a video of their own at 6:45p.m. ET, but ESPN got a hold of video from ebaumnation.com and ran it before TMZ's self-created deadline. Ebaumnation posted it at 3:28p.m. ET and killed TMZ's exclusive. The story itself was weak and the video widely seen as a joke. It wasn't even a real story but nationwide competition forced a frenzied pace. How can any newspaper keep up with that?

They can't. That is why the future of media will continue to evolve/devolve towards the Net. If a media outlet doesn't meet our demands of immediacy, we give up on them. Even magazines are suffering...

Why wait a few weeks to get Sports Illustrated or Vanity Fair when I can poach websites until I feel satiated? The best articles regarding the life and times of Michael Jackson were written by Vanity Fair's Maureen Orth between 1994 to 2005. Orth is the widow of the late Tim Russert and a respected writer.


Her incredibly detailed and damning reports were hardly discussed as the media scrambled to track Michael Jackson's corpse around Los Angeles. The remains of his body became more important than the body of his life. MSNBC spoke with Orth in late June, but has since pulled the video...I have yet to find anything except a brief from The Huffington Post about her appearance. MSNBC and NBC have nothing available. It's sad, but it's indicative of the current media climate.

That's what it has come to. We have to settle for inferior news coverage as the media attempts to figure out how best to cash in on our demands for knowledge.

But, it's important to note that we are also to blame. The Ann Arbor News is effectively dying today because it wasn't enough for its readers anymore. They wanted more and advertisers followed the masses. It's our fault. Our demands are being met quicker, but our understanding of the news is eroding.

The next time you read a truly well-written, researched and unbiased article, email the writer and that person's editor to say thanks. It may not save their jobs or change the media industry, but it will remind those journalists why they got into the business in the first place. To make a difference while telling accurate and great stories.

Make sure they know you care. Because, if they don't think you do, they'll go where the money tells them to go. They will end up ignoring their duties and we will all be worse off for it.

Newsflash...

Dateline: Farmville, Virginia

I am not dead. Friends, I realize how long it has been since I last posted my musings/thoughts on the media industry. I have no excuse. I pledge the following.

By next Friday, July 24, I will return with a detailed observation worthy of your time. Perhaps I'll focus on the continued fascination with citizen journalism, cable news' continued dominance...I'm not certain yet. If you've got a topic you want me to hit, comment or throw it my way via Facebook or Twitter.

Yeah, I'm on Twitter.

All the best. Next Friday. Hold me to it!

Local TV Stations Must Invest in Sports

First and foremost, I need to apologize for not blogging more often. It's been over two months. I've got both reasons and excuses, but it's unnecessary to list them. I owe devoted readers an apology...so, I apologize.

Careful observation of the 'local television news' landscape shows an alarming trend. Across the country, respected and market-leading stations are dumping their sports departments. If they aren't dumping them, they're gutting them.

Many stations have stopped investing money, show time and (most importantly) concern in these reporters and anchors. Ever since Richard Huff in the New York Daily News started beating the drum about whether or not local sportscasts are needed, a national discussion about the topic has heated up.

In his article, Huff discusses how small market audiences could generally do without sportscasts. But, in his opinion, the larger markets such as New York could not. In fact, the opposite is true.

As often is the case, Huff was probably foreshadowing a future column. Three days later, two sports anchors at WCBS got axed and Huff had the story. WCBS had made cuts to their sports staff and programming in the previous year and perhaps Huff got wind that more cutbacks were on the way.

But, as far as the necessity of local television sports coverage is concerned, Huff is dead wrong.

It's not his fault, he's looking at it from the 'big media' market perspective. Large market fans have it good...in general. In New York, Boston, L.A., Detroit, Philly, etc., there are multiple options to get content. If you're a Celtics or Red Sox fan, as I am, you don't have to go any further than SportsCenter if you want scores, quick highlights and brief analysis. Large market sports coverage is generally slightly more in-depth and gets a few more minutes of time on game nights. Lots of large market network affiliates have created additional sports programming like call-in shows or weekly 'coach talks' to give fans more content.

Most of those major cities also have their own city or regional cable outlets. MSG, NESN, Comcast, etc. Those cable groups carry the sports content the rest of the day. There is no need or want for more coverage. So, it's easy to say that 'local' sports coverage from the network affiliates isn't necessary or at times irrelevant.

However, if you're a 'medium media' market sports fan, cheering on teams in Pittsburgh, Minneapolis, Memphis, Oakland, etc., you can't get that kind of access via the national cable media. You can only turn to regional cable (FoxSports Pittsburgh) or your local stations. After that, it's up to the fan to surf the Web.

It's important to note these regional cable guys get a lot of respect from the community. The best in the business is Dan Potash at FoxSports Pittsburgh. He's so big, people post video of him walking past them on YouTube. That's pretty big.

And, unfortunately for the 'small media' market sports fans, you've got very little media content to rely on. Sure there's always the Web; but after that, it's up to local radio and local television coverage. And, if station managers buy into this mantra that sports coverage isn't necessary, these fans will suffer tremendously. And suffer for no reason.

It's important to clearly identify my bias. I was a sports reporter and anchor at WDTV in Clarksburg/Bridgeport, West Virginia. I may NEVER live THIS picture down, but I loved my time there. And occasionally miss it a great deal.

Our market was media market #166. There are only 210, so our station fit the 'small market' group. In our little neck of the woods, we served North Central West Virginia and essentially rode the coattails of the West Virginia University Mountaineer athletic teams.

We fared as they fared. When they played well or made postseason bowl games or tournaments, we produced special half-hour shows and brought in thousands of additional advertising monies to the station. If the teams did poorly, our shows reflected it.

But, in our viewing area in the great state of WV, we were IT for local sports. While our competitors averaged three minute nightly sportscasts, we averaged five minutes. On weekends, we would receive unprecedented chunks of the evening news. Our sportscasts would average anywhere from eight to ten minutes or more every Saturday and Sunday night. In our newsroom, it was established that sports would 'earn their time' and we certainly did. We were all local, all the time.

And we were good at it. When the state-wide awards roll around every year, WDTV is well represented in sports despite only having two full-time staff members in the department. I've got a few plaques to prove it.

During my time at WDTV, I coveraged dozens (and I mean dozens) of Little League All-Star tournament games. I'm talking about first round tournament elimination games for 8 & 9 year-olds. I've never heard/seen of another station doing that. But, the local people loved us for it. No matter where I went, people recognized us as the leader in TV sports in our area.

Our competitors had more resources, but we had the will, work ethic and attitude to dominate our market. And, as far as sports coverage is concerned, we DOMINATED. People respected us and watched the news for our stuff. I knew more than one person who set their alarm clocks to wake up in time for our morning sports report. That meant a lot to us.

Much of that success was due to the tenacity of sports director Joe Brocato. When I took the job, I had no idea what I was getting into. But, I knew right out of the gate that I had never met a guy like Joe. He outworked everyone. His passion for his job is incredible. He made me care about every story and about every person. He was my mentor and greatly influenced my approach to my job and broadcasting. Joe cared more about the daily effort than any person I have ever met. And Joe wanted to win every sportscast, every night. He is a competitor.

And his passion and intensity affected everyone in the newsroom and even in management. Joe had to fight for our time, but he won a lot of battles and earned their respect. Sports coverage was appreciated and cherished at WDTV. Maybe not all of the time or to the extent we wanted it, but we were respected.

But, that respect came from our hard work and willingness to cover any story. We never lost sight of the role we were playing for local sports fans.

Unfortunately, lots of televisions sportscasters have lost their ways. Too many are comfortable in running national stories, slapping video over it, sending out a photographer to shoot a game for them and wrapping it up in two minutes every night at 10 or 11. They got lazy and unwilling to do the work. If they don't shape up or get out of the way, sports on local television may perish.

When you apply for sports reporting/anchoring jobs, every news director puts the words "I don't want any SportsCenter want-to-be's applying" in the job description. But, lots of news directors didn't practice what they preached. They didn't demand local coverage and medium market sports reporters started focusing on national stories.

I don't want to sound too harsh here. I know all of the work that goes into TV...it's quite a lot. But honestly, watching local TV sports where I live now makes me sick. I've got DirecTV in a market-less place in Virginia. Because of that, we get Richmond, VA news pumped in via satellite and I've watched them all.

And, while I hate to say it to guys/gals I respect, Richmond TV sports coverage is garbage.

-They don't run enough local content.
-They don't get off their rear ends to shoot enough local content.
-They don't get much time to show it in anyways.
-They don't seem to care much either.

The top locally-rated news station is WWBT, NBC 12. NBC 12 has been kicking tail in the ratings for years. Last December, a week before Christmas, they canned their sports director along with several other staff members. Then sports director Ben Hamlin had been with the station for 28 years. As a viewer and former reporter, I felt his reports and content were getting stale. Lots of national stuff without much of a local focus. But, he was a great on-air persona and clearly respected by the community. He deserved better and so did NBC 12's viewers.

NBC 12 also runs the content for FOX 35 News and the station lists only two sports anchor/reporters. That's two guys to cover all of the stories, night in and night out, for two stations. It's ridiculous and insulting.

I don't blame Jamie or Joe, NBC 12's sports guys. I don't know them personally. But, I watch them when I can. And when I watch, I see two guys that are knowledgeable about sports in the area yet seem detached from it as well. I believe the blame lies on their newsroom management. They aren't provided with the time or resources to show us much else.

As a viewer, I demand more.

As a former 'sports guy,' I am downright angry.

Whenever we worked our tails off to create a half-hour show or fly across the country to continue to provide coverage for our viewers, we never saw an additional dime. But, our managers and sales staff did. They sold our reports in special sponsorship ad packages to local businesses. Almost everything we did for high school football or 'bonus' coverage was stamped by a car dealership or law firm. All of that was extra dough to cover our trip expenses and pad the commissions for whatever salesperson could work a telephone.

Though I could complain more, I'll move on. Long story short, whenever we worked hard and did our job, the station made more money. We also got more viewers. It was always at our expense...our time, our sweat, our work. But, the station and our viewers were better for it.

That's why opinions like that of Huff's are incorrect. Local television sports coverage is good for the local fan. But station managers across the country are forgetting that.

Consider this case in Scranton, PA. Three different stations with three different approaches. WNEP is the area's #1 station and, interestingly enough, is the one station in the bunch that prides itself on airing nightly sportscasts. They trimmed their time, but are the only station committed to nightly sportscasts in their market. They have three reporters/anchors to work for their station, while NBC 12 in Richmond has two. Scranton is media market #54, Richmond is #58.

Many news directors claim they are investing in airing more local news stories, but how can we actually know if that is the case? A few more seconds for weather or another commercial, and that time is gone. And, stations are literally turning away viewers.

I urge station managers and news directors to take a chance on local sports coverage. Don't limit their coverage or time, force the anchor/reporters to go and seek more stories. Television journalists aren't working for their stories much anymore, they show up to events and piece-meal soundbites together. Not a lot of time for investigative pieces nowadays. But, to win over the viewers and keep them tuned in, news directors need to train and then to trust their staff.

People say local TV sports is dying. It will only die if the sports reporters sit idly by and allow it to. They need to aggressively attack their audience by getting back out into the communities. Talking at high school events, visiting classes, actually GOING to local games, covering the 'fringe' sports, etc.

By covering Little League baseball, we hooked viewers for life. If a parent was truly appreciative of us showing their eight year-old punch a double to score a run in an all-star game one Tuesday night, they would keep tuning in to see what else we were showing. Those viewers stuck around.

That is what makes Joe the most recognizable sports guy in the northern part of the state. Even now, years removed from working in the area, when I meet someone from North Central WV...it always comes up.

"I know you from somewhere. You worked at WDTV, right? You worked with Joe Brocato?!? Cool. I watch him all the time."

I'm always proud of that. Proud to be associated with a fine product and with a fine man.

News directors need to invest time in local sports or more viewers will stop investing time with those stations.

Don't push sports viewers to cable, because news viewers will follow them. If that happens, local TV news will die.

And no one will be watching to mourn it.

Stay The Course: Journalism Students Shouldn't Fear For Media's Future

As our campus sprung back to life earlier this week, with many folks slowly re-entering our academic world, I prepared to meet my news writing and broadcast production students anew. But, I felt that in our first classes together I needed to address the 'elephant' in the newsroom. The future of mass media.

Many students are quite concerned about the job climate upon their graduation either this year or the next. Who wouldn't be? There are certainly reasons to be concerned. Lots of reasons. Journalists, scholars, media watchdogs and consumers are all collectively watching in horror as our nation's newspaper industry is being eviscerated.

Gannett employees have been required to take an unpaid week off. An unprecedented move.

The Star Tribune could be filing for the big 'B' in Minnesota.

Want to buy the 22nd largest paper in the country? The print version is up for bid.

And for 75K (a cool 100K on Sundays) you can advertise on the front page of the NY Times.

From small to monstrous, no newspaper is going unscathed. But, the broadcast media has felt the pinch as well. Major layoffs in Miami, Sacramento and Denver shocked the industry last year. No station/market is safe. Check out the list my friends at tvjobs.com have compiled. Stations all over the country are swinging axes. In radio and in TV, hours are being reduced...shows cut and responsibilities broadened.

All of that could make a journalism/media student think about a life in sales, retail or cubicle country. But we all know what happens when people work in cubicles too long...they put a gangster beat-down on the copier/printer/fax machine Office Space-style. (Not for virgin ears)

If you're 'called' to be a journalist, don't run for another major/occupation just yet. This may be the storm before the calm. Many in the media are losing their jobs but there are positions to fill in their wake.

The one-man-band era has been on the verge of taking over the media world for several years. Now, it has officially arrived.

It started in journalism schools whose graduates then entered the media world at the small market level. Their responsibilities were then reduced as they went higher up the market ladder. They no longer had to shoot for themselves or cut their own tapes. The station had that covered. Dig up stories, hit the streets, report, write, front it and go home. Your friends in the back of the newsroom (the part not always on the tour) will do the rest.

Not anymore.

Those editors and videographer/photographer positions are slowly fading from newsrooms. Sure the more dominant companies and larger markets can afford to and will continue to carry some of those positions. But entry-level reporters are expected to be skilled in multiple platforms of story-telling. Video and audio editing, writing for the Web, basic videography skills, etc. Stations and papers hope to see college graduates 'prepackaged' with knowledge across all mass mediums.

And they've been getting it. Though the responsibilities are certainly greater for each cub reporter, they can handle it in a given workday and save the company thousands in additional salary monies. In rough economic times, why would any organization pay two or three people to do the job that one talented (though overworked) person could do alone? Though the transition happened quite slowly, those organizations are thinning out their newsrooms and streamlining their products. The result may not always be better news but it is nearly always better business.

This trend, while not favorable to those embedded in the media industries, works heavily in the favor of the untested but well-equipped college graduate.

My undergraduate journalism courses (way back in the '90s) focused on the inverted pyramid, the AP stylebook and an endless barrage of articles and interviews. My radio and broadcast production courses forced us to venture into an editing booth a grand total of three times. I wasn't ready at graduation. It took some time and thirty grand for graduate school to get the experience I needed. But that isn't the case anymore.

Now, the top academic programs in the country and those striving to match them immerse their students in all forms of media. Classes attack the Web with fervor. The average journalism graduate in this country is now familiar with print, broadcast and Web writing techniques while also being able to produce audio and video projects.

These students are tech-savvy and forward-thinking. They've grown up with Internet in their homes or even bedrooms. They haven't hand-written anything but class notes and most won't even do that anymore. Typewriters? Those are in museums and attics. Twitter, Gabcast and all of the social/professional tools on the Net have made instantaneous access to news an expectation, not a novelty.

And they are carrying that mindset into the workforce 'en masse' every December and May. And they will get jobs.

They are cheaper than the industry veteran who won't budge. They are more willing to adapt to newer technologies than the photog who sticks by their DVC-Pro or Beta tapes. The doors to the newsrooms will be reopened to veterans willing to take on more responsibility and/or a pay cut as well as to the next wave of so-called 'backpack' journalists.

Those currently in the business of telling the news are certainly already wary. Either you embrace it, or you lose your job. Joanne Ostrow's article in the Denver Post last month detailed KUSA and KMGH's efforts to morph their journalists. KUSA is one of the most respected television stations in the country and has been seen as an industry leader. If the leader of a top 20 market is going this way, expect many more to follow. This isn't to say KUSA is keeping all of its employees as they move forward. They let go of veteran news anchor Bob Kendrick just before Halloween. There will be attrition.

Reading Ostrow's article, one notes how KCNC's management feels a little differently about 'one-man-band' journalists. Of course they do; they cut over half a dozen staff members a few months earlier. One of which had just received a national press award for video editing. It will be interesting to see how they compete as KCNC and KUSA have been neck-in-neck in their market's ratings battle. Which approach will work?

It's likely that industry executives will be more willing to bet on the one-man-band reporters.

As Tim Robbins' character Andy Dufresne says in the movie "The Shawshank Redemption," you either "get busy living or get busy dying." Newsrooms that want to live are going to continue to open their arms to younger (and initially cheaper) journalists who can do more with less.

Future journalists of the world: Don't panic. Jobs are awaiting you. Even in the print industry...just more will be required of you. Across the board, all news providers are going to turn to 'backpackers,' 'VJs' (Video Journalists) or one-man-banders. While you may have to enter an unwelcoming newsroom at first, your skills across the mass mediums will pay off. Just be sure that you and your company are keeping up with technology.

You'll be ready.

As long as I see you in class.

*Writer's Note: My sincerest apologies for not sticking to my guns about more frequent posts. I have only excuses but no proper reasons. I'll do better.

Testing, Testing...1-2-3

Working on some new ideas for the Advanced Media Writing course and trying out a 'neat' (I know I'm the only one that still says that) new website where you can post audio to the Net straight through your cellphone. Just neat (there I go again) stuff...

Click to listen...it's not much...yet: My Gabcast Channel