Well, advertisers are where the networks make their money. And advertising online is not nearly as profitable as on the tube. I don't think it is due to lack of effectiveness. (Although I've seen arguments that people can tune out online advertisements more easily than TV ads.) But the main problem is that you can measure how many people look at an on-line ad, but not how many people wonder out to the restroom during a TV ad. So comparing on-line ads to TV ads compares fairly hard numbers to optimistic guesses. That lets a broadcast or cable station charge a lot more per effective eyeball than an on-line webcaster.

I've watched a couple of Gossip Girls now - and I don't love it the way I loved the OC but it's okay. (It lacks the humor.) But I can totally see what you mean, ita - it's like a humorless East Coast version of the show. No Seth!

I couldn't get through the first ep. I am predisposed toward dramas set in high school/young adults and this one made me gag.

They're just going to have to do more product placement and make way more entertaining ads.

Or, you know, no more teevee.

They're just going to have to do more product placement and make way more entertaining ads.

Yeah, maybe everyone'll suddenly start wearing Levi's jean jackets, like on Roswell.

GG already had basically an entire episode sponsored by Victoria's Secret.

It totally has humor. It's just a little less centered in one character, and is a bit darker.

The streaming thing is interesting. I wonder how it's ratings did on Monday. I haven't checked yet.

le nubian... well, if you really hated the first ep, I doubt you'll love anything else. But it has been, so far, the worst episode.

This week's episode was pretty weak, IMO. FAQWife & I have enjoyed GG in general, though. I agree with Gris, that the show does have it's dark humor.

Also, it's still on iTunes, so it's not like the CW is completely divorcing new media.

And advertising online is not nearly as profitable as on the tube.

I just read a news report saying online advertising for the first time is now more profitable than traditional advertising. It really depends who you ask.

I think the argument here will be that streaming isn't free of expenses for networks. I'm guessing.

I can see exactly why the Jericho fans are sending nuts again - it provided the network with an excuse/reason to make another series last time. Gotta give them credit for targeting Variety, too.

I just read a news report saying online advertising for the first time is now more profitable than traditional advertising.

Wow, if on-line is even close, that is big news. Link?

It's that intermittent reward thing. It makes the fans stubborn.

Or crazy, according to Skinner, who found inconsistent rewards mixed with inconsistent punishments drove rat insane.

Heh. Of course, they were likely crazy before.

The industry's inability to get a clear understanding of the new world of on-demand viewing habits is a big problem, bigger than even a nuclear bomb going off in the middle of the lone prairie.

Wow. That's a pretty tenacious thing to say.

The crazy is contagious, because I didn't let the audacity of that statement hit me. I just thought about how they had no grasp on Jericho canon.

(See, the bombs didn't go off in the middle of the lone prairie. The nearest one was Denver and see with the crazy?)