I appreciate your concern for Burbank and the Tonight Show staffers, and I think at this point in US history all of us know at some level the devastating impacts of losing a job. Without minimizing that, the move to NYC will also be a welcome boon to roughly the same number of people, in the same industry, there. I don't think the impact on Burbank or the specific staff can be a determining factor for NBC about its strategy.
I am less skeptical than you about the Late Night move to SoCal - I think it is all but a certainty. Lorne will just exchange producing duties of LN with the Tonight Show. But I think there are real questions about the wisdom of the underlying strategy here. I don't think we can say NBC is clearly being stupid by moving Leno out early in favor of Fallon, but your suggestion that they are confusing long term strategy with impulsive desperation is certainly plausible. I was obviously a big critic of NBC's treatment of Conan, but behind that I have always thought their original mistake was the initial decision to move Leno out of the Tonight Show before his time. It does seem odd that one of the few time periods NBC still rules (are they still ahead in the evening news?) is the one they seem so determined to screw around with; one might think they would let the 11:35 pm slot take care of itself for a while and devote their long term programing genius to prime time (or morning). Fallon, unlike Conan, is not threatening to go anywhere, and it is unlikely that the Winter Olympics is going to make a big enough difference in the ratings launch for Fallon that it is worth giving Leno the bum's rush. Let the dude play out his contract and retire with some dignity at the end of the summer. Is that really so hard? Paradoxically (because NBC is doing all of this putatively to counter=program against him) I think the real winner here is Kimmell. He will now have LA to himself at 11:35. He has the perfect persona for that town - snarky enough not to be seen as a sycophant, but savvy enough to indirectly kiss the right asses - and now hip enough to be a place where celebs who want to present themselves to the under-40s want to be seen. Fallon meanwhile will be fighting it out directly with not only Dave, but Stewart and Colbert too, not to mention the sloppy seconds from the morning shows, and even a little bit from SNL ( though I guess we will be getting a lot of cross promotion there). I am about a bizillion times more likely to watch the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon than I was Jay Leno (because I just constitutionally can not stomach more than 10 seconds of Leno on that show), but that does not mean I think this is a good move, either ethically or strategically. On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Kevin M. <drunkbastar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Deep breath... and... > > The local CBS O&O here in LA did a decent piece about how Jay's firing > (if we're going to call what happened to Conan a firing, we must also > call what is happening to Jay a firing) will impact Burbank. NBC sold > the Burbank studios a few years ago and moved most everything except > the Tonight Show to Universal Studios. That dealt a harsh blow to > Burbank. Even if Late Night moves to Southern California, which I'd be > skeptical of since it sounds like Lorne Michaels will now be EP of > every NBC late night program, they won't go to Burbank -- they'd > operate from the Universal lot. Unions in this area are funky, which > is a nice way of saying they do not play well with each other and have > the oddest factions and rivalries. Consequently, union guys who worked > on an all-TV lot like NBC Burbank are unlikely to be able to easily > transition to a film & TV lot like Universal. Many behind-the-scenes > guys at NBC are in their 50s... or older (that studio had a much > higher retention rate of personnel than the average), who are less > likely to get hired in an industry that values low salary requirements > more than experience. The net result being roughly 170 Tonight Show > staffers (that's the number from KCBS) will be out of work. > > The mayor of Burbank was interviewed, and he seemed absolutely > crushed. He pointed out the ripple effect on the city losing such a > show (after all, he experienced it do a lesser degree when Conan moved > it, and "The Jay Leno Show" lacked the same draw). Local businesses > are gonna close. Real estate prices are going to drop. The former NBC > studios will likely be knocked down in a few years. > > Someone asked in this thread what alternatives NBC had. Well, earlier > threads have hashed and rehashed what NBC has done right and wrong > with late night programing over the last several years, and I think > the solution exists in long-term thinking. The Fallon move seems like > a long-term strategy on its face, but I believe otherwise. To me the > move smacks of corporate lackeys having a knee-jerk reaction to senior > executives who parrot the phrase "make it skew younger" over and over > again. It is the only reason why NBC would be rocking its own boat. > > I've seen it with other franchises. I'm admittedly a science fiction > fan, so those are the easiest examples to draw from. Babylon 5's > Crusade, Stargate's Universe, and Star Trek's Enterprise were all > attempts to appeal more directly to younger demos. Younger casts were > brought in, storylines featured more sex and more slam-bang action > than earlier shows in the respective franchises. And the net result > was severe harm to the franchises. But let's set aside the fact that > Fallon's potential for skewing younger isn't necessarily a good thing. > > Looking at the countless interviews with David Letterman wherein he > said doing a show in Los Angeles is much easier provides a major > obstacle to Tonight: NY. Booking guests is much easier in California. > Despite the work being farmed to other places, Hollywood is still the > belly of the beast. New York gives them access to Broadway stars, > which I think the "make it skew younger" mindset wouldn't list as a > benefit. Tax incentives are terrific in NYC from what I hear, but > again that is short-term budgeting that isn't looking at the long-term > strategy of producing a better show. > > The solution I would have suggested, but would never happen, would > have been to allow Fallon to guest host the Tonight Show during Leno's > hiatus weeks, and to play up the banter between them in a more > entertaining and less scripted manner than the musical number the > other night. Think of how sometimes Jon Stewart tosses from his show > to Stephen Colbert's. As we mentioned and some asked about Brian > Williams' appearances on Leno's show over the years, how many times > have Leno and Fallon shared a stage? I count 4 times in two years. > There is nothing to really suggest to me that Fallon knows what 11:35 > means. I'm not saying he has to do a conventional Tonight Show, but it > was obvious that Leno, Letterman, and O'Brien put thought into that > timeslot, and though I'm far from a regular Fallon viewer, I'm not > convinced he and his staff have. > > Another solution would be, to skew younger which is clearly what they > want, to kill the franchise. Mind you, it isn't a solution I would > want personally, but I could envision a M-F 11:35 timeslot with > everything from sketch comedy to animated (Adult Swim) shows... > multiple shows, or a single show that could be more than > monologue/interview/band/credits. Make the timeslot experimental and > cutting edge, which would lend itself to younger writers, stars, and > demographics. Give the network an appearance, however false, of > vitality. Heck, they could do some of the shows from LA and others > from NY in that hypothetical. > > In summary, yeah, tough to summarize this one... I admit I was all > over the place... I heard from a few people whose names I can't > mention who will be out of work when this all happens, and my fondest > memories of working in TV were all centered on the NBC Burbank lot, so > I suppose I'm taking it personally. But if I had to sum up, I'd say > NBC is putting all of its eggs in Jimmy Fallon's basket (located in > NYC), and that seems short sighted and way too risky, especially when > broadcast networks are already struggling. > > ... and breath. > -- > Kevin M. (RPCV) > > -- > -- > TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "TV or Not TV" group. > To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
