The Sun-Herald

All I can say is thank God for the ABC and SBS without these 2 channels ,AU TV is only fit for retards. The only concern for the Commercial channels is the advertising dollar. Why can't they show the commercials like SBS which by the way are quality commercials and when do you hear a screaming hoon on an SBS commercial.?The way the commercials are shown on commercial TV is a disgrace,it is rude and cynical.I was watching a show last week CSI and there was less than one minute to go in the show and guess what, there was a commercial and the show comes back on with the end and the credits lasting one minute. The mind boggles at the logic of such cynical behaviour .
The bottom line is the commercial channels show no respect to the viewer only respect to the advertisers. I have a dvd recorder with 220 hours of viewing . I watch what I want to watch and it is not from the commercial jocks (jokes) I watch what is happening in the real world with the help of the 2 who seem to care more than the other 3 free to air rubbish!

• by robyn aylward on February 27, 2006 at 06:26 AM

..anyone know the rock song played in the background of last night's (sunday) closing credits to channel 7's winter olympics telecast

• by Tezza on February 27, 2006 at 10:37 AM

I've really been enjoying the daily ratings. But what about Friday and Saturday nights? Surely I'm not the only one watching Iron Chef and Parkinson.

Tribal Mind comments: Yes. You are. But we will inquire further into the fascinating world of Australian weekend entertainment. Watch this space.

• by dude on February 27, 2006 at 01:14 PM

Hmmmm what riveting tv last night. Isn't this supposed to be the ratings period? CSI x3, Law and Order x3 or 4, what is with all the death and murder? Hurry up Greys Anatomy! Funny witty comedy! And I know i will get burned for this but Hurry up Big Brother! At least it sparks controversy and gets you talking - even if you hate it you still know the housemates even if you say " oh you know the fat blonde annoying one"
Channel 10 bring back Seinfeld repeats, Ch 9 bring back Friends repeats!Channel 7 bring back That 70's show!

• by Annabelle on February 27, 2006 at 03:48 PM

David,
Does the idea of shows being a lead in to those that follow still apply in this century?
It seems to me that there would be some follow-on but surely it's overstated when most people have remote controls?
Decades ago a station could grab eyeballs for the 6pm news and know many of them stay on that station for the evening. But that's when remotes were rare and people less inclined to change.
In my experience people flick around the channels during ad breaks, let alone at the end of a program.
I'm writing after reading about the news mob at Nine blaming their ratings woes on Bert's Futile Flop. Perhaps they'd be better off differenciating themselves from Seven?
Could you enlighten us in a future article about how much people migrate around channels compared to 'olden times'?
Finally - it's a sad state of affairs when I get more enjoyment from your columns about TV than I do from the box itself.
Cheers,

• by Peter on February 28, 2006 at 04:23 AM

It's a shame Numbers isn't doing so well, especially up against Desperate Housewives (can't stand that show)...Its doing pretty steady in the US. But the lead in from Courting Alex is doing Jack - that show is a bore (and I love jenna elfman!)
Mondays is definately one 10's of 10's weakest days...

• by Mary on February 28, 2006 at 10:22 AM

Shameless.. wow what a great show. its too bad i get sidetracked every monday night and miss it!

• by Damien on February 28, 2006 at 11:46 AM

Dude - no, you are not the only one watching Iron Chef and Parky on the weekend! I look forward to more on TV weekend entertainment (almost an oxymoron).

• by mogstar on February 28, 2006 at 02:07 PM

We are all aware of how incorrect and silly with existing rating's method. What about SMH Enternatinment Blog does it's own rating survey? I am sure it will be a good start and give it time, SMH maybe able to rival and challenge status quo to represent the real voice of viewers rather than TV Stations. This will hopefully swing the power back to the viewers and advertisers!

• by ozboy1999 on February 28, 2006 at 03:05 PM

I have already seen the 2nd episode of series two, because I downloaded it from the internet. Aren't I clever.
I honestly don't believe that people still watch TV - it is all rubbish, especially those commercial networks. And if you need me to explain why... well I am better than you!

• by Rupert McSnurkle on February 28, 2006 at 03:25 PM

Iron Chef and Rock Wiz are the best thing on TV on Saturday nights. What I really want to know is where the hell has the Sunday night movie gone - I am so sick of CSI, SUV, ETC - FYI CEO's - too much of something can be a bad thing.
Is Boston Legal still on? Great show.

• by lou on February 28, 2006 at 03:36 PM

Monday's my favourite night on telly but I'm obviously in a minority:-
Australian Story
South Park
Dark Place
& SHAMELESS (one of the best show on TV)
and I usually tape Four Corners/Media Watch & whatever's on ABC at 9:30pm to watch on Tues night!!

• by Jo on February 28, 2006 at 03:38 PM

Recently we decided our 3 y.o. was watching too much TV on weekdays. The tantrums trying to get her away from shows like Dancing with the Stars were too much. And now we've decided it's not worth turning on once she's gone to bed. Best decision we've ever made about TV!

• by Carney on February 28, 2006 at 03:54 PM

Lou - right with you pal - surely all the crims have been caught now - CSI, L & O and their ilk are well past their use by date. Of course Foxtel aren't helping their cause - the Showtime and Showtime Greats offerings are pretty dismal most Sundays, and I'm not yet ready to invest further money into Foxtel Box Office coffers.
Best show on TV ? Adam Hills and the Spicks and Specks crew - go Myf !

• by Pete on February 28, 2006 at 04:01 PM

The "lead-in" effect of DH on the ratings for CIC should give Nine pause to reflect on what it might have had on it's hands if it had treated West Wing decently. ie ratings period, stable time slot and a decent lead-in.
I love Geena Davis, but this is floss and while I think Donald Sutherland is a great actor, he is so predictable he should have a black hat on in this role.
Now if only Geena would reprise her role from "The Long Kiss Goodnight", I am sure that Charly would give Mackenzie a real run for her money and not take shit from anyone.

• by Stephen Ryan on February 28, 2006 at 04:10 PM

Commander in Chief was good, for the first half hour - then i went to bed becasue it was on so late. I hope they change the time - they probably only put it on after D.H becasue thats the major rating puller.
And what is with bloggers like Rupert McSnurkle that make comments like i can't believe people still watch tv!(fyi this is a blog that takes comments on what we watch on TV. Der)
Pffft get over yourself you illegal internet downloader. unless of course its legal then, sorry?

• by Annon on February 28, 2006 at 04:23 PM

CIC was based on the premise that the Vice President was an independent candidate who the president expected would resign if something happened to him. Funny, no-one bothered to mention this to the vP until tragedy struck the Pres. As if such a thing would not have been worked out in advance.
Another time we were expected to suspend disbelief was when the new Pres addressed Congress, and the autocue malfunctioned apparently sabotaged by the wicked Speaker. Of course, the Pres had no backup speech notes (as if) and gave a stirring address off the cuff. Whattagal!

• by PK on February 28, 2006 at 04:35 PM

What is it with so many TV presenters, they are so hopeless?
OK, maybe I could not do a better job, but surely there are people who could do better?
My major complaints:
Daryl Somers: Need I say more? Don't sing, don't tell jokes, stop falling over your words, just don't host DWTS.
Jessica Rowe: I only saw a little of her once but it was enough. Too fake and giggly.
Naomi Robson: Absolutely lacking in charisma, needs to relax and stop looking so evil.
Bert Newton: Past it, old man, past it.
Those blokes from Australian Idol: Well maybe they suit Aussie Idol, but they're not as funny as they think they are. Maybe they suit that teenybopper audience though. Since I don't watch much (only seen it a few times) doesn't worry me too much.
Rove McManus: I hope he refines his skills, he seems a nice person, but he is riding too much on his fame and is lazy nad seems too think he is much funnier than he actually is. Quit the funny faces and laughing at your own jokes. Also, learn how to conduct an interview without having the guest walk all over you.
I think some really good hosts/presenters (suited to their own shows) are people like Adam Hills, Andrew Denton, Jana Wendt. Charismatic, in control of the show, professional, talented. Aren't there more people like this around? Even some people half as good.

• by Tina on February 28, 2006 at 04:45 PM

Fair dinkum, give me a break, who would watch Commander in Chief when the so called ratings system was telling Channel Nien no numbers of any significance was watching The West Wing. 1.7million hahahahahahahahahaha yeah right!

• by gasbo on February 28, 2006 at 05:16 PM

I watched commander in chief last night - it really is the most banal pap i have seen for quite some time - i wont be watching it again

• by snorky on February 28, 2006 at 07:09 PM

Why is everyone talking about Commander in Chief? Dave, were you paid by Margaret Thatcher??

• by Michael on February 28, 2006 at 08:02 PM

CIC is lightweight and has all the production values and feel of a midday movie.

• by Peter on February 28, 2006 at 09:45 PM

This show is just like west wing a hedgamonic show about rome. shameless
window dressing to cover up the illusion that the USA is a undemocratic corpocracy where over a 3rd live below poverty.Bring back some english or australian comedy to help us forget the crap we are subjected to everyday.

• by someone_with a brain on February 28, 2006 at 10:31 PM

I read all the great reviews about CIC. Baloney.. As an American who immigrated here over 30 years ago, I can tell you that if you want realty and gripping story lines, stick with West Wing to show you how things work. CIC is a cute little fairy tale, probably written by a friend of Geena Davis. I think she is a great actor, but this story is schmaltz,
with little substance or fact.

• by Donna Pearce on March 01, 2006 at 06:53 AM

I watched Commander-in Chief like most to check it out. whilst i really wanted to like it, it really put me off when Geena Davis bristled that if some Islamic nations don't like a female president, then they will just have to get used to it. Excuse me? What an outwardly ignorant comment. We were led to believe that Geena Davis as CIC was an erudite and well-informed character. Memo to CIC script writers: In real life, the most populous Muslim nation on earth, Indonesia has already had a female president in Megawati Sukarnoputri, and one of the most outwardly Muslim nations - Pakistan- they too have had a female president in Benazir Bhutto. Poor America. It is only in the fictional world that they can dream about a female president. And she has to be six feet tall with a strategically placed beauty spot. You really know Islamophobia is bad when popular 'culture' can get away with such disingenuous crap.

• by safa on March 01, 2006 at 08:47 AM

I think it is tragic that Commander in Chief rated well. Commander in Chief is Days of Our Lives dreaming that it is West Wing. Davis' character's State of the Union address was about as inspiring as watching paint dry, compare it to any speech given by Jeb Bartlett in West Wing and the difference is chalk and cheese.
West Wing is a show that can pull both emotional and intellectual heartstrings, yet Channel 9 couldn't find a place to show it (good ont he ABC for grabbing it). Sadly, Channel 7 takes this retarded version and makes it a ratings winner. What does this say about the average viewer?
I suppose the most disheartening thing is that a show like West Wing, which is unapologetically clever, gets relegated, while this fluff becomes a winner.
No wonder we have such crap politicians if the general populus chooses Davis's character over Jeb Bartlett, Matt Santos or Senator Arnold Vinick

• by JohnW on March 01, 2006 at 09:37 AM

Commander-in-Chief perpetuates the dangerous myth that American military power can solve foreign problems. Geena Davis’s character’s plan for a military strike to ‘extract’ a woman condemned to be stoned to death in Northern Nigeria was riddled with errors and insulting to the intelligence. Such intervention in an area prone to Muslim-Christian riots in which thousands have died, risked innocent lives by sparking new outbreaks, and logistically could not be accomplished as proposed. In a post-Iraq world, the idea that the US Joint Chiefs of Staff would go along with such a foolish plan and that the Nigerian Ambassador would be tongue-tied with fear is ludicrous. In reality, Nigeria is a complex democracy in which behind-the-scenes diplomacy and commercial pressure yield results (witness that no-one has been stoned to death since a dozen states in the Nigerian federation adopted Sharia law). Its first episode demonstrates that CIC is going to ride roughshod over reality to create simplistic artificial drama, in contrast to ‘The West Wing’ which creates real drama out of complex, believable situations. Contrast, for example, the episode in the first series of TWW in which the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff dissuades President Bartlet from a knee-jerk military retaliation to the shooting down of a US plane in favour of a longer term, covert and strategic operations against the perpetrators.

• by Kasama on March 01, 2006 at 09:55 AM

How does All Saints pull that many viewers. It the most pathetic Aussie "drama" since Blue Heelers.
I was watching The OC, better looking people, better acting, better storylines!!!
Hooray and p.s i totally predicted Molly would go - Simone = sympathy vote

• by Annon on March 01, 2006 at 10:38 AM

All Saints will be dead and buried in the ratings within six weeks. Another Australian show that had mild beginnings but never a real chance as poor plots and unbelievable characters paraded themselves as "drama". It will go the way of Blue Heelers, another show that traded on the "Aussie Made" premise instead of good meaty acting.
I'm not a huge fan of American dramas, but whilst Australian shows remain such a poor quality I will continue to watch my favourites.
People these days do not want to watch a plot unfold over 17 weeks, they want short, sharp episodes that are concluded within the hour, or at most over two weeks. They want quick entertainment. With todays busy lifestyle they want to know that they can miss an episode or two and it won't matter. But in the end they just want to be entertained. If you want thinking shows, watch the ABC & SBS (Go the Mythbusters!), but for comic relief you can't go past our commercial networks, and boy do they have commercials!!!

• by pigboy on March 01, 2006 at 10:50 AM

I watched the first episode of CIC for a few reasons. I think Geena is a good actor & more power to her for coming back with something different. For all those who have said the show is not good & putting such a negative spin on it, I'd have to say your patience astounds me. they have 60mins to outline the beginnng of what may very well be a great series. If it happens to go the other way & (as some call it "FLOP") so be it. I personally think it wil do well but lets wait & see.
I thought at first the show the OC was quite a FLOP but it proved me wrong (yet i still watched it)
Go Geena. More power to you....

• by Lezel on March 01, 2006 at 11:38 AM

I can't understand the ratings for all saints. As it started at about 10.00, my household gave it a big miss - too late. What was annoying about Dancing was they had a singing group stuck on at the end, when it was already overtime.

• by David Kennedy on March 01, 2006 at 11:57 AM

Ahh the demise of Australian drama. It will only be too long before they announce All Saints and MacLeods Daughters is no longer. Although CIC pulled in the ratings, I'd like to see it one series on. I'm just hanging to see the new series of Greys Anatomy. I wonder what time slot Channel 7 will give it? Better not be late, could get a bit messy as to which show they'll bump off prime time...

• by Shez on March 01, 2006 at 12:09 PM

A genuine question: Was Simone Warne well known in her own right before marrying a famous sporting personality?
If (as I suspect) she wasn't, how does that make her a star - as in 'dancing with the stars'?

• by willowtree on March 01, 2006 at 01:04 PM

Having learned ballroom and taught some time ago, the standard of Dancing with the Stars is at about Bronze medal level, which is the first judging level after taking private lessons. Six weeks is about right for anyone. Some will be better than others.
Simone Warne is one of those that no matter how many lessons she takes she will still be plain god awful. Her brain doesn't click with the music, beat, rythm, body and or movements. She needs her freinds to stop telling her she would make a TV star. She doesn't and should find something better to do off screen. I did like her dress last night though. Absolutely stunning.
The Human Nature guy naturally is going to better after this amount of time, as was Bec Cartwright. They can both related to rythm, 3/4 and 4/4 beats. If you can't here them, you can't dance to them, and musicos can naturally hear them.
As for the rest, the standard is pretty low at the moment. Lets see after three months who stays and who goes. From my professional background I'd say that Alicia Molik has no idea and won't last long. The fact that they have so many bad people as well as good in this series allows them to fire people over the next few weeks. My guess is Alicia, followed by Simone followed by the Rugby guy. The rest is too hard to tell because all are pretty below average. Molly's partner though deserved a better star to work with. Is her name Alana Patience? anyway, she is very professional, one of the best ballroom and Latin dancers I have seen. And technically perfect. A rarity these days. Except for me.

• by Ex Ballroom Teacher on March 01, 2006 at 01:21 PM

Just saying glad there was a decent episode of The Simpson's last night.
This season has been damn soft so far so glad we finally got a goodie. Was concerned that it was all over for our favourite family.
Am not watching those Z-grade celebs prancing around, however I would like to know how skimpy Hawkins clothes are. Thanks.

• by miso_kool on March 01, 2006 at 01:45 PM

If my husband plays cricket and shags pommy tarts does that mean I can be a star too? Please pick me to be the face of pathetically weak pitiful women! Pleeasssse! Simone Warne, get a job and new root and look after your kids.

• by Lucy on March 01, 2006 at 03:44 PM

I don't know about the rest of you but I am tired of Simone Warne. She is not the only person to have picked a lousy life partner and her trying to move on by dancing in a talent contest for desperados makes me ill. Channel 7 should stop turning her into a martyr!

• by Naomi on March 01, 2006 at 04:14 PM

Can anyone explain what has happened to Law & Order Criminal Intent? Where are Goran and Eames?

Tribal Mind replies: as the SMH TV guide and other magazines have reported, Goran will be on every second week from now on, because the actor (Vincent d'Onofrio) was feeling too stressed by a weekly schedule. If you put those words into google, you will find a fuller answer.

• by Mark on March 01, 2006 at 04:24 PM

Who is the PR machine pushing Simone Warne onto us? She is not a celebrity, but a women who's husband publicly cheated on her. If Australia did feel sorry for her, they would have voted her off last night (and out of our lounge rooms in the process). At least then she would have gained some dignity back into her life.

• by Trish on March 01, 2006 at 04:30 PM

interesting comment by FK, so Indonesia , Pakistan , Bangladesh and Turkey have/had female rulers, hows that working out form them ? with the state those countries are in give me a male for the top job any day !

• by dan on March 01, 2006 at 04:41 PM

Can someone answer my question regarding ads?
When a TV show ends and the FTA channel commandeers half to 2 thirds of the screen to show an advert while the credits roll - is the time used by the station in showing the advert calculated into the advert time per hour as regulated within the industry?
or are we being duped again ?
Also on a similar line - when the cricket is shown and we get Tony Grieg or other commentator flogging the "limited edition cricket trinkets" or other upcoming televised events on channel 9 - are these counted are regulated adverts?
What about the scrolling ads on the bottom of the screen - are they counted as well?
The regulations state that ads cannot exceed a certain number of minutes per hour, but I believe that the TV stations are abusing the regulations by using these techniques.
Could someone like FACTS or other regulators really check into this and provide details to the viewing public - then enforce the regulations to the fullest extent of the law.........
Also if someone could get them to start and finish programs on time so the viewing public can watch or record the programs when they are publicised to be shown it would be greatly appreciated.

• by Sick of FTA on March 01, 2006 at 04:57 PM

Good on you Virginia. The way Channel 9 treated Jim Waley was awful.

• by legless on March 01, 2006 at 05:11 PM

I watched a few minutes of Clever and it looked like they got their ideas and even some of their footge from that awful Braniac show that channel 10 had.
as for lead in shows, well I don't care...like most people I decide what I want to watch and watch that. If there is something on that is good after it I will watch it, but I won't stay on a station just because I started on it.
also, I STILL find the idea that 1.3 million people only are watching that program a litle hard to believe. In ALL the mainland capitals? it just doesn't sound right...

• by mike on March 01, 2006 at 05:21 PM

From Contact Music
COMMANDER IN CHIEF TAKES A BREAK
US presidential drama COMMANDER IN CHIEF has been temporarily pulled from the ABC TV schedule because network executives are unhappy with the show's low ratings.
The drama has received critical acclaim and actress GEENA DAVIS, who plays president MACKENZIE ALLEN won a Golden Globe for her performance, earlier this month (16JAN06) - but that isn't making the show a hit.
Network executives say the series will return later this spring (06), insisting it's not unusual to take a show off the air and try another new show in its time slot.

• by tim on March 01, 2006 at 07:47 PM

Can anyone tell me if CH 7 & CH 10 are still on the air? We got fox digital in OCT 2004, and haven't been able to get them since?

• by Dave on March 01, 2006 at 11:39 PM

Prison Break isn't doing it for me, but then House is getting a bit stale, as well. Mind you, they're both more attractive than Mcleod's Daughters. Wednesday night 'prime time' isn't too exciting, overall, unless you like ads!! Seven seems to have the goods this year, at least so far. I'm sure that Nine will thump everyone during the Comm Games - but that's only for two weeks - then back to Magda & Bert?

• by neil on March 02, 2006 at 10:14 AM

House still rocks. The first few episodes were good and it gets better further into season 2. Wait and see. And West Wing over Commander in Chief although it was a pretty good first episode.

I think the problem is that people have shorter attention spans; the networks have jerked us around so much that we're all pretty cynical and some programs screened are crap (when there's great programs "on the shelf")

• by parker on March 02, 2006 at 11:08 AM

I've watched all the episodes of CIC and it does improve and find its way a little, but overall it doesn't have anything new to say apart from the woman-as-president factor, which quickly grows stale, and then it's just down to the usual "Isn't America great at solving the world's problems" unfortunately without the wit of the early West Wing. It has its moments, but they are never strung together into a credible cohesion.
And yes, Kiproc, President Laura Roslin would eat President Allen for breakfast, or simply shove her out the airlock.
Unfortunately Channel 10 won't be letting us make that comparison any more it seems, they've given Galactica the boot, making it another sad tale of quality science fiction fare gone down the gurgler in Australia, unsupported by media or networks.

And as for All Saints, I gave up on watching it at 9.55 and went to bed. Apparently it aired half an hour late. Why isn't there a broadcasting practices law against this?

• by Ozwi5ch on March 02, 2006 at 11:36 AM

I agree, Wed nights are boring and boring! Prison Break last night got a bit too full on for me, bashing and alluding to male and female. It was just sick. Although Wentworth Miller is a huge drawcard i couldn't bear to watch. Please put something worthwhile on 9 or 10. House is a pathetic DRY hospital show with very 2D characters. I don't like the character of house either, can't stand him!
I really am hanging out for the amazing race tonight though!
And it was commented that 9 will trump 7 overthe commonwealth games period, im not so sure. But what I am really not looking forward to inthe Comm Gmaes is the swimming. They put so much emphasis on people doing bloody laps up and down the pool when there are so many other great sports to be watching. I really hope 7 doesn't only put swimming on at night. Also how will 9 trump 7 if they have no good TV? Im sorry but CSI just doesnt cut it for me anymore

• by Annabelle on March 02, 2006 at 12:43 PM

I must be in the minority of people who read this blog. I LIKE Bert's Family Feud, and Commander-in-Chief, and never really got in to Stargate. I quite like Dead Like Me, Rescue Me and The Collector on Foxtel.
I would call my tastes in TV different - sometimes I watch to get entertainment (e.g. CIC's Donald Sutherland really should dress like Dick Dastardly I think - I saw a few episodes other than the premiere in the US when I was there last year), sometimes for education, sometimes to just veg out and not HAVE to think about what I'm watching.
The one thing I do, though, is to tape the things I want to watch, so I can fast forward through the ads (I do the same with my Foxtel IQ).
If there is nothing I want to watch, and I have already seen my "stockpile", I also have a CD player!

• by pp on March 02, 2006 at 12:59 PM

All commercial channels treat their viewers with contempt ... all run their shows late and overtime and chop and change around late night shows. I mainly watch ABC or SBS these days ... or else TURN THE TV OFF and go do something else.

• by cassandra on March 02, 2006 at 01:17 PM

The problem with Prison Break is that they probably won't escape until the final episode of the series. People have a short attention span these days and aren't willing to invest themselves for the whole 22 weeks of an American series.
With a show like House, it's a different story every week. The private lives of the main characters mostly provide backburner stories. You won't miss much if you miss a couple of episodes.
If TV series are to survive in the future, I think there will have to be less episodes every year, of higher quality. It makes sense to make a series of ten episodes. If it's a success you make more, but if it flops you just move on.

• by J Bar on March 02, 2006 at 02:26 PM

Ratings? Surely most people record prime time shows to the hard drive of their PVR and watch them at a time that suits? That way you get the chance to completely ignore ads by fast forwarding through them and can watch a favourite show, while recording two other top shows which are being broadcast at the same time. The ratings mean nothing, it's three in the afternoon and I'm about to watch the Bill from Tuesday night in full digital widescreen. They can stick their lead-in programs where the sun don't shine, I record what I want to watch and watch it when I want to!

• by Jeff Gehrig on March 02, 2006 at 04:22 PM