Online streaming service Hulu hit the headlines twice this week when they announced that, firstly, when an as-yet unnamed company made an unsolicited enquiry regarding acquisition, and then, secondly, that they were indeed, open to offers of acquisition. This follows yet more recent news and opinions on the future of Hulu, with constant talk of an IPO, then its subsequent delay.

The streaming giant has caused quite a stir in Hollywood, and opinion has been pretty divided: some say it is the savior of TV, others say it has affected film industry jobs for the worse. Their launch of a premium subscription service, Hulu Plus, last year helped the company edge into solid profitability territory, and obviously peaked the interest of some internet big wigs. NBCUniversal, Fox and Disney-ABC all currently have stakes in Hulu, yet have limited influence on the overall running of the company, and this had led to clashes among board members and CEO Jason Kilar about the way it has affected older revenue streams of cable and TV. This may in turn be the reason for those holding companies looking to exit the venture.

Hulu announced that it would retain investment banks Guggenheim Partners and Morgan Stanley on Wednesday, who will then reach out to any prospective bidders with news that they are formally accepting offers. Expect the rumor-mill to start churning very soon.

The success of Hulu is largely due to their free ad-funded model, which also allows embedded videos of new and archived content, as well as clips and behind-the-scenes specials from providers and studios such as NBC, Fox, ABC and many more. Recently, the free-thinking institution TED has enable Hulu to share and distribute their series of ground-breaking talks. The embedded feature helps clips such as this go viral…

Hulu’s actions may well be blazing a path for the future of visual content for the end user, but the key TV networks and companies sure have kicked up a fuss along the way.


by Lee Jarvis.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to our RSS feed

In “The Late Shift”, an early 1990’s television film, we see the behind-the-scenes story of how Jay Leno came to be selected as Johnny Carson’s replacement on “The Tonight Show”, over David Letterman.  We also see that both men were heavily recruited by other networks, and that thanks to Leno’s ruthless agent, he was passed the keys to the kingdom, leaving Letterman to head to CBS.  Things have remained pretty static since then, and even though we’ve seen the emergence of talent like Jimmy Kimmel, Jon Stewart, and Stephen Colbert, Leno and Letterman have remained as the top two talents in late night television.

Now, however, things are again shifting, as Leno makes ready to leave “The Tonight Show” and instead take over the 10p.m. slot just before it.  Word on the streets (a.k.a. various articles and blogs) is that Leno is unhappy with his imminent departure, as he isn’t quite ready yet to give up his seat.  Conan O’Brien, his future replacement, has popped by the show a couple of times, and while not necessarily frosty, lately his and Jay’s relationship has been merely cordial at best.

On the whole, however, everything seems to be fine between Leno and O’Brien, most likely because any rift that’s developed these few months has less to do about them, and more about Leno versus NBC.  Jay is, after all, heading to that 10p.m. show, which gives Conan a great gift in the form of a lead-in to his own time slot.  Besides, Conan was selected to take Jay’s place, so if Jay wants to blame anyone, it should be the executives at NBC, not Conan.  Leno has known for some time that his run on “The Tonight Show” would come to an end regardless of ratings – that he would go out on a high note.  But apparently it’s easier to talk about pulling the plug than it is to actually do it.

Conan actually emerges from all of this the clear winner.  With Leno staying in house, as it were, O’Brien avoids generating the perception that he ran Leno off; Leno fans, in turn, will be more likely to forgive O’Brien for hosting “The Tonight Show”, and may even tune in to watch him.  Also, by staying at NBC, Jay eliminates the possibility of popping up on another network as a time-slot rival (a move that some networks hoped would happen, considering Jay was said to be upset with NBC).

In the end, the new late night shift isn’t affecting “The Tonight Show” so much as it is the late-night shows on other networks.  Comedy Central, ABC, and CBS are toying with various ideas in order to take advantage of the upheaval that will come when Conan replaces Jay (ABC is even considering killing off “Nightline”, and moving Kimmel up earlier).  It will be interesting to see how this current round plays out, and who’s left standing once the bell rings.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to our RSS feed

It’s been announced that ABC has decided not to produce any new episodes of “Pushing Daisies”.  Despite critical acclaim and the love of their small yet fiercely devoted audience, ABC is going to pull the plug.  Is this the result of an inability to market the show properly?  Was the work-stoppage that resulted from the writer’s strike simply too much for the show’s creators to overcome?  Did the diminished returns not justify the show’s high budget?  Most likely, the answer lies in a combination of the three.  When the TV show first premiered, the initial advertising push was strong, as was the promotion for the second season, but any momentum gained last season was seemingly lost once the strike took hold of Hollywood.  

The vocal support from critics notwithstanding, the show faced a steep climb to reclaim the attention of its casual viewers (loyal viewers will always be there for a show they love – it’s the viewer who tunes in in passing who’s the hardest to grab).  In the aftermath of the writer’s strike, this is a perfect example of “the better the show, the harder the road”.  Any show can have problems following up a successful first year… yet battling those problems while also climbing back from a strike is even more daunting.  And although it was a procedural drama with relatively simple running storylines, the show apparently had problems creating a strong second-season push.  It debuted to numbers well below those of last season’s premiere, undoubtedly causing the executives at ABC to rethink their ties to the show.

As the audience, all of this is to our disadvantage.  We, too, are casualties of this strike.  A show like “Pushing Daisies” needs stability and time to grow, due to its own quirky nature and the unusual charm of its characters.  And we as the audience needed time to appreciate it.  But that’s what makes shows like this so much fun to watch, is that they accept their quirks, and in fact revel in them.  From episode one, “Pushing Daisies” knew itself and its characters; they trusted the idea that, with enough time, the audience would as well.  Unfortunately, the strike ruined that, and we are now left to mourn one of the more unfortunate victims of this television season.  

In other cancellation news…
On October 31, 2008, Fox announced its decision to cancel “King of the Hill” after its 13th season, and here’s guessing it goes quietly into the night, with little to no fanfare to celebrate its remarkable run.  And yet this is only fitting, considering that’s how the show has thrived all these years: by keeping below the radar, and plowing ahead slowly but surely.  Much like the main character Hank Hill, “King of the Hill” has been one of television’s steadiest performers, always managing to keep itself relevant despite being seemingly overshadowed by it’s more prolific brethren “The Simpsons” and “Family Guy”.  This television show had a broad appeal that few shows can match; the storylines covered a variety of topics, from a variety of perspectives, and yet it never lost sight of its true self.  The characters, though the lived in Texas, were more than just left or right, red state or blue state… they were real people with real morals, who never bowed to the pressure to change who or what they were.  And in some small way, it’s nice to know they never will.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to our RSS feed

Now that the fall television season has officially kicked off, it’s worth visiting this year’s slate of shows to see what lingering affects there are from the recent writer’s strike.  In many ways, this is a season of proving one’s self, as we find numerous shows returning from strong freshman debuts who are desperate to reclaim what momentum they had prior to the strike.

It’s safe to say the 2007-2008 television season was an unusual one.  The strike caused a work-stoppage that rushed season finales and left many shows (particularly those with serial narratives) in the lurch.  It’s also a safe assumption that heavyweights like “Lost” and “24” will come back in early 2009 at comfortable ratings levels despite the interruption to their respective narratives – both shows have tinkered before with their schedules and have not suffered greatly for it, thanks to their strong fan bases.  But other shows are facing riskier futures, as they had barely had time to establish themselves before being unceremoniously yanked from the small screen.

Look at three of these shows returning for their sophomore seasons: “Life”, “Private Practice”, and “Pushing Daisies”.  At first glance, these shows should see success, for a variety of reasons.  “Life” is a procedural police drama on NBC, which always seems a relatively simple formula of success.  “Practice” is a spin-off from ABC’s incredibly successful show “Grey’s Anatomy”.  And “Daisies” is a quirky ABC show that quickly found a receptive audience for its offbeat yet likeable characters.  Aside from the fact that all three are well-positioned on strong networks, these shows share something else in common: they’ve all been off the air since 2007.  That’s a long time away, yet all three are hoping to pick up where they left off.  Unfortunately, that’s easier said than done.  The fear is that audiences have forgotten these shows and their characters, and they’ll have a hard time reconnecting as a result.  And that’s what ABC and NBC are hoping to counter, with strong advertising and a gradual reintroduction to the lineups.

Television executives are looking for a return to normalcy with popular shows as well, which will also have to reassert themselves with audiences.  And new shows are coming down the line (some retooled, like the newer version of “Life on Mars”, or remakes, like the new “Knight Rider”).  Networks are understandably cautious about green-lighting new shows (ABC had only one new scripted show this fall), and are finding new ways to deal with the changing landscape.  Many are unveiling new shows or episodes in the summer (such as TNT’s “The Closer”, or USA’s “In Plain Sight”), betting that audiences who are used to repeats will be more likely to embrace new fare.

In the end, all it’ll take is one hit show to make a network forget the hassles and uncertainty caused by the writer’s strike.  And so long as they can avoid an actor’s strike, all should be close to normal by the time February sweep’s week rolls around.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to our RSS feed