• Steve Saffran weighs in to say that media coverage of yesterday’s stock drop went for hysteria over context. No surprise, but it needs to be said.
• Further tales of the queer and adorable in the wild lesbian behavior noted in Australian koalas (via Towleraod)
• A look back at Mac ads from 1996, serves as a good reminder to the brand’s history of coming of as summger-than-earned.
• If I watched NUMB3RS, I’d find a blog from the Northwestern University Department of Mathematics that explains the math on the hit CBS drama. (via Pop Candy)
• If you haven’t heard of Conservapedia yet, it’s an attempt to create a user-edited online encyclopedia that lacks the percieved anti-Christian bigotry of Wikipedia. It’s also a comedy gold mine.

A couple weeks ago, Lost drew its smallest audience for a new episode a fade that’s come prematurely:

The show was smart and intriguingly spiked with supernatural and sci-fi twists. It featured hot new stars who graced glossy magazine covers — until the ratings tumbled.

So much for “The X-Files,” which enjoyed a nine-year run before misguided plots and a time slot change eroded its appeal. Flash forward to today and you’ll find its counterpart in “Lost,” another spooky, cerebral, sexy show — which may end up killed off before its time.

“`Lost’ is the tragedy of the season,” said Marc Berman, TV analyst for Media Week Online as well as a fan aggrieved by what he considers ABC’s bungled handling of a favorite show. “They really prematurely put the nail in the coffin. It’s too late to save it.”

The saga of plane-crash survivors stranded on a dangerous and surreal island once drew an impressive 20 million-plus viewers as it helped raise ABC from ratings purgatory, gained cultural-phenomenon status and won the 2005 Emmy for best drama. But eight episodes into its third season, “Lost” has taken a painful nosedive, with an audience of 14.5 million for its Feb. 7 episode and 12.8 million — its lowest ever — for this week’s show…

That final chapter should have been years off for a property which, along with “Desperate Housewives” and “Grey’s Anatomy,” helped ABC (owned by Walt Disney Co.) regain ratings traction and buzz.

In the days leading to Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip’s final episode before heading into hiatus, there was a decent amount of failure analysis on where the highly anticipated show went wrong (and I still say a key problem was that the “inside baseball” drama just had too many moments that rang distractingly untrue). My mind has been more focused on where Lost went wrong lately, so maybe it’s time to start putting the first nails in Lost’s coffin.

Overall, Lost’s downfall can be summarized in the complaint that comes from many of the show’s former fans — that they don’t believe the show’s producers know where they’re going. Now, it very well may be the case that the producers have a definite endgame in mind but their sin greater than that — they lost the illusion that they knew what they were doing.

I don’t think the unanswered questions are the problem as much as that as the show continues, Lost has added mysteries that didn’t show a satisfying progression and that mysteries seem to have been abandoned. Take the questions raised by the flashbacks focusing on Boone and Shannon, Michael and Walt or Libby and Hurley. Those questions look likely to go unanswered now that all but one of those characters have been written out of the show (typically in sweeps month violence). Those may have been dramatic moments, but after the initial rush of adrenaline has passed, one starts to feel like a short term gain was made at the cost of a larger payoff in the future. A number of the questions raised early in the first season felt like an afterthought in the second season — how did a polar bear end up on a tropical island? did Walt have mysterious powers? what kind of creature could be shaking up the island’s jungle in such a threatening manner? Perhaps those questions were answered subtly in a way that many viewers missed, if they did the more important factor is that Lost failed to make its audience feel like it was rewarded for asking those questions in the first place.

Equally troubling, however, was that in its second season Lost seemed to get stuck in a rut. Further flashback episodes for Jack and Sawyer didn’t reveal much additional information about their characters, increasing frustration that the show was feeling like less of an ensemble drama than the one that debuted — other characters still had untold stores but, for some reason, Lost’s producers felt the need to continue to examine how Sawyer was a rogue with a heart of gold. Increasing the frustration, in focusing largely on a few characters, the show’s original non-white characters got de-emphasized. In all likelihood, there was no overt racism in this shift, but viewers who were excited by the diversity of the show’s cast found themselves in frustratingly familiar territory when it turned out that the characters deemed by the producers to be the most interesting were all white. (Consider yourself warned, Heroes… you’re getting close to that danger zone as we speak.)

There’s a little bit of debate if Heroes makes for a better sci-fi serial than Lost with Lost fans noting that Heroes hasn’t had to maintain enthusiasm in its audience or keep several balls in the air as long as Lost. That argument flew out the window for me with this week’s Heroes. In “Company Man” the show answered plenty of questions while raising new ones that are built upon the answers just given. A few characters were at the focus of the episode and yet I never felt like anyone creatively responsible for this episode had forgotten about the rest of the cast. In short, it raised new questions in a way that made them look like new storytelling possiblities, when Lost raised new questions it usually feels like an attempt at distraction.

A couple weeks ago I linked to a blind item that was perplexing me, even though I felt like I should’ve been able to figure it out, concerning a “hit” series that was facing cancellation, despite good overall ratings and improved performance in its time slot, because of poor numbers with younger demos.

Yesterday,  Las Vegas got renewed for a fifth season minus two of its stars — James Caan and Nikki Cox. I suspect that particluar blind item has been explained, with cancellation rumors being a tactic to get the show to cut back on production costs (hence the cast reductions).

Another serial gets rotated out of Shojo Beat’s comic lineup next month with YumeKira Dream Shoppe replacing girl-meets-kabuki-prodigy-boy romance Backstage Prince. I was disappointed to see that this title was one I enjoyed (as opposed to Vampire Knight and Crimson Hero my two “read them first and get them out of the way” titles) but looking at how the series’ exit is announced in the magazine, it sounds like the series will have a very short run of only two volumes.

I did get annoyed, however, when I tried to confirm that impression by visiting the mini-site for Backstage Prince and finding the following:

Admittedly the site is still featuring the February issue even though I’ve had the March issue for a couple weeks, but I’d be pretty frustrated if I picked up an issue of Shojo Beat because its website told me that I could only read Backstage Prince in the magazine, not in collected digests and then picked up the magazine to find out that the title was ending its run in the magazine to run exclusively as collected digests. Even if they want to keep the series’ departure from the magazine exclusive to its readers, would it have hurt to add to the website that the first digest arrives on March 6?

• I wish I realized Adrian Pasdar would be on the Rachel Ray show but a Valentine to whoever YouTube’d it. Pasdar doesn’t use his sexy Jim Profit voice in the preview, but had a differently cute voice in the appearance. I think Kitty will hate the Heroes teaser clip for being 44 minutes too short.
• Overdue link: One of my follow-everywhere creators, Bryan Fuller, a co-executive producer on Heroes and the cretor of Wonderfalls and Dead Like Me talks to BrilliantButCancelled. I wish he talked more about his role on Heroes if only to further my theory that my favorite parts of the show are due to his influence (as if last night Fuller-penned episode doesn’t prove it).
• The Hollywood Reporter’s Andrew Wallenstien weighs in on “The 24 Hour Comedy Hour” with suggestions on how The Fox could add more entertainment programs to compliment the 1/2 Hour News Hour.
• The bits I find interesting about the latest pilot casting announcements: Kristin Chenoweth joins “Pushing Dasies” the new Bryan Fuller dramedy, and Eddie Cibrian will be join the Amercainized Footballers’ Wives as Jason.
• Yeah, I’m not surprised to hear the claims that drinking Enviga burns calories aren’t For my beverage buying dollar, “sparkling green tea” is a compelling-enough marketing point for me… provided that it actually tastes like green tea.

Hoo-boy. Talk about truthiness in action. CBS is declaring that Shark is the most-watched new series even though a glance at the ratings don’t agree with that. So what does CBS base that decision on?

“Heroes” is averaging about 14.5 million viewers to “Shark’s” 13.4 mil.

You and I might say that makes “Heroes” the season’s most watched new show. Number-crunching Nielsen Media Research feels otherwise.

CBS explains:

“According to Nielsen, claims of ‘most watched’ can only be made based on gross impressions, which is number of telecasts multiplied by the program’s average audience,” the network said in a statement sent to The TV Column.

“In the case of ‘Shark,’ it’s based on 20 broadcasts multiplied by its average audience of 13.37 million viewers, which equals 267.38 million gross impressions, more than any other new series,” the network said.

“Heroes,” on the other hand, had aired only 15 times through last weekend, which, when multiplied by its season average of 14.5 million viewers, works out to about 217 million gross impressions.

It’s this same kind of big picture, out-of-the-box thinking that makes “CSI” the season’s most watched series though it’s eating “Idol’s” dust each week.

I hate it when statistics are abused, especially when they’re so easily seen as false.

Okay I need to vent.

I’m facing what probably is a common problem with job hunters (at least ones who’ve been lucky enough to be out of the market for a while) I have a hard time talking about myself. Looking for help I’ve looked through a number of books and websites with advise on resume writing (the first attempt took me a month and I’m still revising it) and cover letters.  So much of the advise I read is… well, a challenge to take in since their examples of good resume and cover letter writing are based on candidates who’s qualifications seem rather easy to summarize effectively. Sample resumes have accomplishments with quantifiable results and cover letter examples tend to showcase the way the superbly-qualified have written about themselves.

Maybe someone has already written it, but there’s this book that’s starting to come together in my head titled “Job Hunting for People Who Aren’t the Perfect Candidate in their Field” with one early chapter that’s subtitled “All those times you saw a problem and fixed it? You weren’t just doing your job, that was an accomplishment” (a common mental hurdle, I find).

I don’t know if I have it in me to write it, but someone should.

Reading a TV Guide interview with Kieth Olbermann, this part jumped at me:

They tried to put in a commentary by [right-wing radio talk-show host] Michael Savage. We had agreed beforehand, when the announcement was made that they were putting him on the air, that I wouldn’t have anything to do with him. They said, “Yes, we understand, we figured that going in.” One night I walk in, and it’s in the show rundown. I called my agent and said, “Look at what they’ve done,” and she said, “You have to walk out.” I had just two months [previous to that] signed a contract. It probably would have been the end of my career. But I couldn’t appear with him because he’s an insane fascist. I finally got a hold of [NBC News senior vice president] Phil Griffin and said no. He said, “Can you look at it and provide me with some sort of television reason that it can’t run?” I said, “So, if I look at it and say it’s wordy or repetitive or amateurishly shot, you won’t force me to run it?” He said yes. So we worked our way out of that….

(Found via The News Hole)

One aspect of Countdown that has resonated with viewers, aside from the more noticeable snark and the viewpoints found easily in the public but not in the media, is the show’s tone. Most people I talk to see cable news as consisting largely of Crossfire-type shows of two (or more) people yelling at each other featuring guests who are better at being loud than being well-informed. I know one of Olbermann’s conditions to returning to MSNBC four years ago was to have only one guest at a time but it was good to hear him refusing a guest (even a pre-recorded guest) who was better at being loud than informed. What gets lost in all the talk about Olbermann’s success is that he puts together a news show that seems to be as tired with the stupidity found on cable news as The Daily Show’s viewers are and is seeking to avoid those pitfalls.

Admitting that, much like in admitting that there’s more than humor driving The Daily Show and The Colbert Report’s success, would be admitting to having done a bad job, however.

Let’s be frank, the one thing Heroes lacks is great female characters… plural. Sure, Claire Bennett is fascinating but Nikki/Jessica has turned out to spend more time whining than kicking ass; after that, the only significant female character who’s still alive is Clea DuVal’s FBI agent who we haven’t seen in a while. So. Heroes needs women as cool as Nathan Perelli, Hiro Nakamura or Mister Bennett. I’ve seen a number of complaints about this failing of Heroes, but I’m figuring why not attempt to tackle the topic in a more positive light, with a focus on solutions? Here are my ideas of women (ones who have the geek cred to match other Heroes cast members like Adrian Pasdar and Greg Grunberg) who’d make Heroes an even better show:

5. Jenima Rooper
As the sharp-tongued ghost Thelma, Rooper became the only reason to keep watching Hex when it forgot about being all smuttily stupid and just became dreadfully dull. Heroes definitely lacks any female characters who brings the kind of confidence, attitude and snark that Rooper oozed on Hex.

	4. Carloline Dhavernais
	Best known for playing a modern-day Joan of Arc on Brilliant-But-Cancelled series Wonderfalls (a show created by Heroes co-executive producer Bryan Fuller) Dhavernais has a tremendous presence that will hold up against similarly powerful actors like Adrian Pasdar and Jack Coleman.

3. Gina Torres

She’s probably best known for her role as the war-hardened Zoe on Firefly, but the performance that sticks with me was Torres’ unsettling turn as the charismatic Jasmine on Angel. Torres’ current show, Standoff, looks like its headed to cancellation and Heroes will need a second season villain… I can’t think of many performers who could build on the menace that Zachary Quinto and Jack Coleman have brought the show, but Torres easliy could.

2. Keiko Agena

Boys like Jared Padalecki and Milo Ventimilglia have gotten to go from hip drama Gilmore Girls to hip sci-fi shows like Supernatural and Heroes, so isn’t it about time one of the women from Gilmore Girls get a chance to save the world? Agena has a scene-stealing presence in most of her roles (see Hundred Percent for an example of how she can be a can’t-turn-your-eyes-away actress) and could turn around any sentiment about insuffienct female presence on this show all on her lonesome.

1. Billie Piper

Piper is best known as the first companion for the revamped Doctor Who.She’s the first companion to a new wave of Doctor Who viewers while fans who’ve followed the series longer debate if Piper’s Rose Tyler or Sarah Jane Smith was the greatest companion. Also, bringing Piper is bound to get the press coverage these high-profile castings aim for. The articles just writes itself — bring Claude (Christopher Eccleson) back and there’s a Doctor Who reunion angle. However, with Hayden Panettiere pursuing a pop music career of her own, lazy entertainment writers will likely feel compelled to ask if there’s any rivalry between the two singer-slash-actresses.

I may have to revisit this topic since I’ve got a page of notes that doesn’t stop at five.

Hearing that Ugly Betty’s debut in Australia was a huge hit, as it has been for Britain’s Channel 4, I’m wondering if it isn’t about time the classic flavor Betty — the original Colombian telenovela — be brought to audiences that don’t speak Spanish. It seems like an obvious move for SOAPnet, which is owned by Disney (creating some nice corporate synergy since Ugly Betty is aired by Disney-owned ABC) and is seeking economical ways to air programs that can’t be found elsewhere. A subtitled or dubbed Betty la Fea would be cheaper to produce than an original, scripted series and thanks to the ABC adaptation, interest in the original isn’t limited to media watchers — high enough to overcome the barriers that subtitles or dubbing poses.

On a related note — do any of the Spanish-language networks air their telenovelas with closed captioning? I’ve recorded a few different shows hoping I’d have a fun way to teach myself Spanish (after all, wasn’t one argument for requiring all TVs to have closed captioning support that it helped immigrants learn English?) but none of them seemed to have captions to help me follow the dialogue.