TVSquad

Paul Attanasio, House executive producer, has conjured up a legal drama for Fox. The network greenlighted a one-hour pilot, Court K, which is set in Milwaukee and involves a judge, a prosecutor and a public defender. Just because it's set in Milwaukee, don't expect to see Laverne and Shirley.

Like House is not your typical medical drama, Court K will not be a typical lawyer show, not that Boston Legal is typical, but you know what I mean. Court K is reportedly a lot grittier, with sardonic, dark comic elements. We'll have to see if any of the principals are hooked on Vicodan. I wonder if it'll remind me of the movie ...And Justice For All, which was also a dark comic look at a Baltimore courthouse. But then, wasn't that Night Court, too?

It looks like the rumors are true: Joe Scarborough is getting the Don Imus spot on MSNBC.

Howard Kurtz at The Washington Post is reporting that Scarborough and MSNBC are in final negotiations to make his Morning Joe show the permanent show in the 6am to 9am slot on the network. Scarborough has been filling in (with other hosts, such as David Gregory) since Imus went bye-bye, and has been getting good buzz (though not ratings). Some CBS radio stations might pick up the show as well.

In an attempt to figure out how Charlie Gibson has been able to power his ABC World News Tonight past the previously dominant NBC Nightly News in the ratings for 10 of the past 14 weeks, Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz credited Gibson's "relaxed style" and willingness to go with his gut.

For example, on Tuesday night after controversial religious leader Jerry Falwell died, Gibson decided not to lead his broadcast with Falwell's death, unlike NBC and CBS. "[T]he decision underscored the extent to which Gibson is firmly in control at what recently emerged as the top-rated evening newscast," Kurtz wrote.

It's starting. Bob Barker's got less than a month's worth of The Price is Right tapings left, and his tribute special is supposed to air on May 17. So now we're starting to see Barker pop up in magazines and newspapers, doing what are essentially exit interviews. In this month's Esquire, for instance, Bob is the subject of the magazine's "What I Learned" page (no link yet), giving his recipe for a vegan enchilada bake and saying, "I'm still sexually active. Just not as active as I once was. I think Viagra does help. You should try it. It might surprise you. And your friend."

Ooookaaay then. A little tamer is The Washington Post's examination of 'The Cult of Bob Barker,' written by the paper's pop culture expert, Hank Stuever.

And please, this isn't a post about "quality" or "that show sucks!"

Actually, it comes down to this: 30 Rock is owned by NBC and Studio 60 is owned by Warner Brothers. That's one of the many interesting bits of info in Lisa de Moraes' Washington Post column. I mean, that has to be the reason.

As de Moraes points out, it can't be because 30 Rock got better ratings than Studio 60, because Studio 60 got better ratings. It can't be because 30 Rock got a higher rating in the all-important 18 to 49 demo, because Studio 60 had higher ratings there, too. And it can't be because 30 Rock gets the upscale viewers that networks and advertisers like, because Studio 60 was just as good if not better there, too. And I don't think it's because Studio 60 is more expensive than 30 Rock, though that might tie into the whole ownership thing.

It is funny to see Kevin Reilly not really talk about Studio 60, a show he was "really behind" and greenlighted for a whole season. The way he talks now, 30 Rock is the centerpiece to NBC's entire future.

I know, you might be thinking, who is Stephen Talbot and why should I care what he thinks of the TV news biz? Well, Talbot is a producer and writer for PBS' Frontline (his new episode, News War, debuted earlier this week), but that's not why I'm posting this. I'll explain that after the jump. In the meantime, go read the chat he has at The Washington Post's site and look at his picture closely. Where have you seen him before?

Talbot has a lot of interesting things to say about the news industry. He likes local news, but doesn't like it when they focus on just local stories, fears that people will just wake up one day and wonder why the only news they get is stuff about Anna Nicole and Britney, and he explains why Connie Chung gave up her great reporting career to do...well, whatever the hell she's doing now.

Oh, where have you seen him before?

A Washington Post columnist was stunned while reading a New Yorker article about 24, which featured concerns from military officials -- including some from West Point -- that torture scenes in 24 adversely affect how U.S. interrogators behave in the field.

Writer Peter Carlson couldn't believe that educated officers emerging from West Point would actually think that they were mini versions of Jack Bauers who could torture people just like on TV.

He quipped, "Gee, if these cadets can't tell the difference between TV and reality, I sure hope they're not watching 'Superman' reruns. They might try to fly out windows or catch bullets."

You've probably seen all of those CBS promos that say that Shark, the new James Woods legal drama, is the "most watched new show." Then how come the Nielsen numbers say that Heroes, the new drama over on NBC, averages 14.5 million viewers while Shark averages 13.4 million?

It's because CBS is using an odd little bit of ratings math. CBS released a statement to explain why they're saying that Shark is the most watched new show. Combined with the Washington Post's explanation of what CBS is talking about, it gives me the type of headache I used to get when trying to read chemistry textbooks back in high school.

Rumor has it that The Daily Show's Jon Stewart is in talks with the Washington Post to provide online content for the Post's 2008 election coverage. Neither Comedy Central nor the WashingtonPost.com's editor would confirm the story. As Daily Show followers may remember, Indecision 2004 was released as a DVD and garnered the show's writers and correspondents tremendous critical acclaim. Stewart's deal with the Post would have him providing written, not video, content to the site. It would be a huge coup for the paper and would make it much more difficult for Stewart to maintain his apolitical, "I'm an entertainer; I don't influence the news" claim.

I'm not sure if I'm a fan of these "What's In and What's Out" lists that seem to pop up every December or January. They seem to embrace trends instead of just quality. But I like Hank Steuver's writing and lists like this are a good conversation starter as the new year begins.

That doesn't mean I agree with him on everything. I mean, David Sedaris is "out" while John Hodgman is "in?" That's ridiculous (though I like Hodgman too). And Dancing with the Stars will never be "in" with me. But I love that he picks America's Next Model as being "out" and Ugly Betty being "in." Ditto his picks for Laguna Beach being "out" (Meerkat Manor is "in") and Dane Cook being "out" (thumbs up to Jim Gaffigan!).

What do you think is in and out, TV-wise? I'm sure they'll be a lot of opinions on Steuver picking Battlestar Galactica as being "out" and Heroes as being "in."

Just when Lost should be regularly beating the competition - we're heading towards the three month break cliffhanger - the show is actually losing viewers. The episode the other night, where Eko was killed off, lost 1 million viewers from the previous week, and was beaten by CBS' Criminal Minds. (Brett talked about this last month.)

Wow, so 17 million viewers actually watch Criminal Minds? I've seen the show twice and didn't really see anything special about it. Are people that frustrated by Lost?

One part of the article I don't really understand though. It seems to have the attitude that the "a character is going to die" episodes of Lost should pull in more viewers, but why? How would you know that a character is going to die unless you actually watch the episode? The hardcore fans of the show and web geeks, the only ones who would know ahead of time that a death might be coming via web spoilers, they're watching the show anyway, so why would that matter? Why would a death of a major character bring a ratings spike? (Or am I totally missing the point here?)

On Monday Oprah Winfrey gave each member of her studio audience not a Pontiac, not an iPod, not even a lousy copy of O Magazine stashed under their seats. Nope. The lucky audience members were each given $1,000. Holy crap! A thousand dollars, Oprah? Thanks.

As you might imagine, the audience went nuts until Oprah dropped the bombshell. That $1,000 would go to someone other than themselves. That's the kind of gift that makes rich people feel good about themselves, and the rest of us feel sorta horrible. Sure, we want to give money to charity to. We'd like the good feeling that comes with tithing and personal philanthropy. We'd also like the good feeling that comes with paying the phone bill on time.

I'm not sure I like this news. The television reporter at the Washington Post is reporting that every episode of My Name is Earl will not be about checking something off his list. According to Lisa de Moraes, the writers/creators felt confined by the format and only stuck with it to see if they could get through the first season (and be renewed). Apparently, some episodes will have nothing to do with the list. The Post reporter doesn't say what the other episodes will be about. The writing on the show is definitely hilarious but I kind of liked the gimmick of Earl having to cross something off his list each week. Although, I can see how that would get old after a few seasons. Guess we'll have to see what they come up with. See how I talked myself off the edge?

How do you feel about this change?

The Brady Bunch (and The Partridge Family) were weekly rituals in my house when I was a kid. My sister and I would get a huge bag of candy down at the corner store and come home and watch both shows on Friday night.

So it was interesting to see what Cousin Oliver, aka Robbie Rist, is up to these days. As fans of The Brady Bunch know, he was brought on to the show later in its run to add something to the show. I don't know, maybe a cute factor or just shake things up a bit. But all he did was annoy fans, and many people see this as a big "Jump the Shark" moment. Even Rist himself says he has that web site to thank for renewed interest in his career.

Check out what Rist looks like now. Quite a change.

[via TV Tattle]

Ah, yes, the two-bit weasel slug. I remember seeing something about this on Animal Planet. They're only found in certain climates around the world, and are usually harmless, unless provoked by sports columnists.

A few days ago we talked about Tony Kornheiser's worry that he would be a flop on Monday Night Football. I didn't see his first performance so I can't comment on it (but you can go ahead and put your comments below), but his coworker at The Washington Post did and wrote a review of it. And now Kornheiser is fighting back at Paul Farhi's review, calling him a two-bit weasel slug and saying he's someone "I would gladly run over with a Mack truck."

For the record, the coworkers here at TV Squad never say bad things about each other. Ever.