Showing posts with label TV critic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TV critic. Show all posts

Thursday, February 25, 2021

TV NEWS ROUND-UP. Today's interesting TV reports and articles to read - 25 February 2021.


Here's the latest news about TV that I read and that you should read too:    

"I hate myself and my life right now," says the TV personality and influencer who says she needs to make better choices.

















Saturday, October 17, 2020

TV NEWS ROUND-UP. Today's interesting TV stories to read - 17 October 2020.

 

Here's the latest news about TV that I read and that you should read too:  





■ Heard the one of the NBC CNN lover who got whispered state secrets by her ambassador during their extra-marital affair?
Britain's former ambassador in America, Kim Darroch leaked to his secret lover, the former NBC CNN (DStv 403) Michelle Kosinski correspondent all kinds of government and White House secrets to the consternation of the United States.















Tuesday, September 19, 2017

DAILY TV NEWS ROUND-UP. Today's interesting TV stories to read from TVwithThinus - 19 September 2017.


Here's the latest news about TV that I read, and that you should too:

■ A new satellite pay-TV service, TStv, says it plans to launch on 1 October in Nigeria - but will it?
TStv blatantly plays on MultiChoice's DStv name, and promises a mix of TV channels already available on DStv and StarSat/StarTimes - but how will that work?
TStv even promises English Premier League (EPL) soccer coverage - but how?

■ Why the series finale of the vampire drama The Strain on FOX (DStv 125 / StarSat 131) ended with a glimmer of hope.
"Bleaker versions were discussed" but the producers felt the audience would "feel too depressed" and that it "just didn't seem like it would be very satisfying".

■ Sean Spicer on his surprise Emmy stage appearance.
He explains how it came about, what scared him - and a lot of interesting details of what happened afterwards. And even more fascinating insight in another first-hand report with details from what he said afterwards.

■ The viewership of the 69th Annual Prime Time Emmy Awards 2017 remains at a record-low. Viewers don't see the air-conditioners blowing outside to keep the red carpet cool, while Allison Janney ironically complained about global warning during the show.
- And how The Handmaid's Tale - a 32-year old book, became a timely TV show and the toast of this year's Emmys.

■ The programming bosses of America's big TV networks reveal the strategies
in a MUST-READ on how they plan on turning around falling ratings for the new TV season.

■ The ratings of kids TV is falling sharper than any other viewing demo in America.

■ Corporate paranoia is growing inside ESPN, the American sports channel that dumped Africa a few years back and is now trying to worm its way back to the continent through Kwesé TV.
ESPN is embroiled in ongoing embarrassment that current and former ESPNers describe as "self-inflicted wounds" as inside angst grows.
-While ESPN's problems keep piling up, ESPN seems confused about what is really happening.

■ Yet another American TV critic is a gonner.
Jeff Jensen is out at Entertainment Weekly - and he finally burns it down in a MUST READ as he reveals how trash Warner Bros. was in deliberately excluding Entertainment Weekly from its media strategy for launching the Harry Potter movies.
Of course EW did a cover story anyway and scooped the rest to serve its readers. Warner Bros. realised its time to crawl back and play nice.

Sunday, August 26, 2012

TV CRITICS. Perspective on who we are, what we do, what we're not and why writing about television is not personal.

Video streaming by Ustream
If you write about television as a TV critic or a journalist covering television or a TV writer in South Africa, I want to implore you to watch this fascinating panel discussion between America's top-tier TV critics which I've watched this weekend.

If you work in television in South Africa, I would implore you even more to watch this if you want to learn, grow, grow in your understanding of how and why TV critics and journalists act they way they do, and get more insight into how TV critics think and operate.

The panel discussion is 1:30:00 but I can absolutely assure you that if you're a TV critic, or love television, or work in television, that it's absolutely worth watching and worth your time.

ALSO READ: The TV critic's role - A perspective on what the TV critic, writer an journalist covering television is trying to do - and what they're not.

Cynthia Littleton, the deupty editor of Variety in America was the moderator of a panel discussion about television and the new upcoming TV season in America.

On the panel was Robert Bianco, TV critic for USA Today, Tim Goodman, chief television critic for The Hollywood Reporter, Brian Lowry, chief television critic for Variety and Matt Roush, senior TV critic for TV Guide magazine.

The whole hour and a half is great. At 1:15:00 when they talk about their relationship with people in the TV industry - do they have friends, how do TV channels and executives behave towards them - I just rolled my eyes and thought ... exactly true of South Africa as well.

"It's not personal," said Brian Lowry about TV people who are extremely oversensitive within the industry and freak out about stories and reviews. "I heard from someone recently who said "I thought you hated me'. And I said "No, I hated that show. I now like this show. People tend to internalise and think you're writing about them. Meanwhile you're writing about their work."

"I've known that for a long time Steven Levitan thought that I didn't like his shows or didn't like him. I didn't like a lot of the shows. Now Modern Family I think is the best comedy of the decade. It doesn't matter to us who you are. We're not your friends. We're not socializing with you. And one thing about not being [based in Hollywood is] that we're not your industry. We're our industry. We are our own separate industry and we're writing about you. And we're writing about the work you do."

"Once I was hard on somebody's work and the person's agent called and said "What do you have against my client? What is your problem?' And I said 'It's television. I'm judging the work. It isn't working for me. And next time, it might be better.' And actually, you know what, it got a lot better," said Matt Roush, senior critic for TV Guide magazine.

Tim Goodman, the chief TV critic for The Hollywood Reporter said "I try not to be friends with anybody". "There's very few people I've become friends with, but those ones; they can take it. The same with network executives. I've only had one person really take things really personally. I think that most of them know that its a business. That if you don't like their show that it doesn't mean that you don't like them - or their network. And you just hope that they do better work next time."

"This is my 26th year," said Robert Bianco, television critic for USA Today. "And if I stop today, there may be 5 people who would take my phone call. You try not to turn it into a personal relationship. But the truth is in most cases, they're not interested in turning it into a personal relationship. A lot of people I think make the mistake of thinking that, 'Oh we're all such good friends.' And then you don't have the job and then you're not good friends."

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

The TV critic's role: A perspective on what the critic, writer and journalist covering television is trying to do - and what they're not.

As a professional journalist covering television in South Africa and as a TV critic the last 13 years (although I've written about television even before that) it amazes me how overly sensitive, extremely secretive and ultra thin-skinned South Africa's TV industry is/remains.

Much more than others.

As a hard news journalist I've covered the insurance industry, the banking sector, did general hard news covering the beats of crime, court, politics and human tragedy (with more sad and horrible stories and images I will never forget).

And none of those come close to how people in South Africa's television industry often react to stories and what they would call "bad" news or "bad" reviews written by critics and journalists.

Personally and speaking for just myself, my aim has always been, and semains, to give credible, objective, real - sometimes opinionated - truth and the real facts and honest reviews about television in South Africa. We need more TV critics, and we need more TV critics doing that. It helps to make better television for those it's for: the viewer.

Because a lot of journalists in South Africa covering television (often as a sub part of being a broader entertainment journalist) and TV critics are very junior, don't know better and don't care to learn, simply don't read, care more about goodie bags and access to parties than actual journalism and reporting, they've by and large become merely extensions of South Africa's TV industry's PR machine - running those reams of press releases only when issued, and basically unchanged as issued.

What an almost crime when you dare to write something "ahead" of time. Is it any wonder South Africa's TV world can't cope when news is leaked ahead of the almightly press statement?

And woe to whoever dare trash a TV show or TV channel after another sad, bad and distasteful trash production makes it onto the air, followed by the jubilant self-congratulatory messages producers and cast write on each others' Facebook pages.

I wish more people working in television in South Africa had the mature, seeing-it-in-perspective viewpoint of someone like Aletta Alberts, the past few years the general manager of content at MultiChoice South Africa, and someone I have a lot of respect for. She's excellent; lives, breathes and knows television.

Over many years - having spoken at many, many events addressing TV critics and writers covering television as she worked for different places, Aletta Alberts would always conclude her speeches whether its a new show, new personality, new line-up or new channel launch, by saying: "Write what you want, but please just keep writing about us".

How astounding, outstanding, and a clear perspective. Why am I saying all of this?

Brian Lowry, writing for Variety, America's one daily trade publication (where they have several publications which include daily coverage of the TV industry; in South Africa we have ...) has a fascinating and very truthful reflection today about the role of the TV critic.

It's so important and so true - also for South Africa's TV industry and critics and people writing about this medium - that I'm republishing it below as it appears today in Variety, written by Brian Lowry:

Last night I participated in an Academy of Television Arts & Sciences panel, moderated by my colleague Cynthia Littleton and featuring three of my favorite critics: USA Today's Robert Bianco, the Hollywood Reporter's Tim Goodman and TV Guide's Matt Roush.


At one point the conversation turned to advice for producers, and it was suggested they shouldn't take criticism of their programs personally. When confronted by an agent regarding why he was critical of a client's work, Roush said he responded the guy's crime was being "in television." In other words, you produce TV, and I review it. It's no more personal than a lion hunting a wildebeest. Just part of the food system.

Wise words. It's never personal, or at least shouldn't be. I've had producers and executives convinced I had vendettas against them, only to discover I don't when they put on a show I respond to favourably. In similar fashion, producers I've admired for years have put on programs I panned.

The New York Times magazine just featured an essay by Dwight Garner, in which he discussed criticism in the context of disappearing book-review sections. In the broad strokes, though, his piece -- and particularly this part of it -- could have easily applied to reviewing any form of the arts:
The sad truth about the book world is that it doesn’t need more yes-saying novelists and certainly no more yes-saying critics. We are drowning in them. What we need more of, now that newspaper book sections are shrinking and vanishing like glaciers, are excellent and authoritative and punishing critics -- perceptive enough to single out the voices that matter for legitimate praise, abusive enough to remind us that not everyone gets, or deserves, a gold star.

Two more small points on this. First, people often say a certain critic is "mean" or overly harsh. But without imposing some kind of standards positive reviews tend to be meaningless. There's nothing worse than finding out a critic loves your show or movie, and then reading his or her rave about something you think is completely awful.

Second, everyone's a critic in their own way (what could be more subjective?), and it's hilarious how people who are often most sensitive about negative appraisals of their own work, once drawn into conversation, can be positively brutal in assessing that of others.

Nobody sits down wanting to hate something. That said, in the modern age – where networks often send out multiple episodes of shows - it’s easier to become testy. Although the first couple of episodes of Scandal cemented my opinion, I confess to growing a trifle irritated ABC sent out all seven before the show made its debut, which felt more punishing than enlightening.

Admittedly, negative reviews can be more fun to write, though sometimes that amounts to rewarding oneself for having survived the screening process. Either way, think of critics as the Mob. It's not personal. It's strictly business.

If you want to read Brian Lowry's reflection in Variety, you will find it here.