What I Learned From Jay Leno's Prime Time Debut: Part I

Monday night I watched the Yankee game on the Yes network in New York. It was an exciting game highlighted by good pitching, timely hitting, excellent base running, and savvy managing. It was great television because it was unscripted and, thus, had an unknown and surprising outcome.

During commercials and pitching changes in the Yankees game, I switched to ESPN's "Monday Night Football," which featured another unscripted and, thus, unknown and surprising outcome as Tom Brady of the New England Patriots coolly and confidently brought his team from behind to beat a tough Buffalo Bills team with only two minutes left in the game.

I then remembered that Jay Leno was making his prime time debut at 10:00 p.m. on NBC, so I quickly switched to Channel 4. I caught Jay introducing his first guest, Jerry Seinfeld. I haven't watched Jay Leno's "Tonight" show in over 15 years and the last time I watched a prime time regularly scheduled network comedy or drama program was the last episode of "Seinfeld" in May of 1998.

I now know why I stopped watching prime time terrestrial network TV programs (ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX) - they're boring, scripted, and totally predictable. The new Jay Leno show was no exception. The interview with Seinfeld was stiff and overly scripted; even the phony pre-taped appearance of Oprah was stiff, boring, and predictable. The apology by Kanye West was maudlin and gave unnecessary exposure to a clearly troubled young man.

Jay's faux interview with Obama was way too cute and disingenuously self-deprecating - a suit that does not fit Leno, who looks uncomfortable in any suit. And his final bit of showing goofy headlines and ads was a tired rehash of his old "Tonight Show" routine. It featured lowest-common-denominator, puerile, smutty humor - exactly the kind of dumb material that appeals to the majority of people who still watch prime time terrestrial network TV programs: the poorly educated, the poorly informed, and the culturally and intellectually barren.

Therefore, Leno's prime time debut got great ratings, according to the NY Times' Bill Carter in his Media Decoder blog, by attracting 18 million viewers, which "exceeded expectations."

I'm baffled by the notion that NBC "expected" fewer than 18 million people to watch Leno's debut program after the incredible hype NBC produced for the show. It must have forgotten H. L. Menken's line "that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."

Leno's new program was touted to be "the future of television" by Time magazine. Of course, this quote was featured in a story in the NY Times by the constantly error-prone Alessandra Stanley, who, once again, in spite of being caught making serial mistakes in her obit of Walter Cronkite, was wrong in her facts. Her squadron of fact checkers were asleep at the switch again (they must be members of the NY Times union - the New York Newspaper Guild - and, like Stanley, can't be fired).

In her story she writes, "the reading of goofy misprints taken from newspaper headlines." Leno's final bit did not consist of all misprints. Many were merely headlines that could be read in an unintended and different way, and they were not all from newspaper headlines. Many were from stupid ads, such as the final one, an ad for a Chinese restaurant - The House of Poon - which Leno leered at.

Stanley also gave the Leno debut show a tepid (and insipid) review that made a big deal out of the Kanye West apology, which was apparently serendipitous, and never mentioned the much longer and more substantial faux Obama interview. Did she watch the program?

Not only was Stanley's review poorly written and inaccurate (which has become her MO), it had no bite, which I'm sad to say has become de rigeur for NY Times TV coverage - it was taken on the personality and characteristics of the medium it covers.

So what did I learn from watching Jay Leno's debut and reading about it in the NY Times? 1) Don't watch Jay Leno's new prime time show; it's dull and overly scripted. 2) Don't watch prime time terrestrial network TV entertainment programming; it's not entertaining. 3) Don't read about TV in the NY Times; its coverage is insipid and inaccurate.

In other words, as always, I didn't learn anything new on network TV.

But what did I learn by watching WBNC-TV's local news right after the Leno show? I'll tell you in Part II.

And what did I learn by going to WNBC-TV's Web site after I watched the local news? I'll tell you in Part III.

Follow Charles Warner on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CHWarner

Comments

[yoshimi75]

I agree that the Jay Leno show is not good television by any means. I completely agree. I was baffled however that this started as a review of Jay Leno's first show then morphed into a review of Alessandra Stanley and the New York Times.

I also have to agree with Tallulah's comments above.

My review of this review is that it didn't stay on topic, had quite a bit of arrogance and used the word insipid too many times.

[Classof89]

This is nothing more than Leno's Tonight Show, sans a desk.

And as for the NY Times' Alessandra Stanley, who is the head of human resources over there? Judging by their hiring practices, the NY Times' HR department is in need of some serious overhaul.

[DasBoot]

I was, frankly, disappointed by the first show, which implies (I realize that) that I had some expectations. I think Jay is a likable guy who can tell a joke, so why not expect him to lose the suit and tie, which never fit him, and do something else?

I like Stewart, Colbert, Maher etc., but that doesn't mean that all my comedy must be political or high brow or whatever. There is a place for silliness. It's just that Jay apparently has lost all creativity. He just keeps using the same segments, and then the horrible, horrible interviews.

[lglglg]

Two mistakes: you described a baseball game as "exciting". Second: you misspelled 'de rigueur'.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

Or perhaps he meant "jejune."

[longtalldrink]

I was really surprised at how un-surprising Jay's show was. I was looking for cutting edge and all I saw was Tonight Show Lite. Not even a good Lite either, more of a less taste, less filling kind of way. It is a shame too, because Jay is really funny and kind of cool in an "old hipster" kind of way. He should rethink his writers. Jay could probably do better than them with his eyes closed.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

"I was looking for cutting edge"

You were looking for "cutting edge" in JAY LENO? Jay hasn't been cutting edge in 20 years.

[Classof89]

I never realized that he's ever been cutting edge.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

"the majority of people who still watch prime time terrestrial network TV programs: the poorly educated, the poorly informed, and the culturally and intellectually barren."

Thanks darling. I click on to read a review of Jay Leno's new show, a less-spontaneous, more-dumbed-down version of the neutered Tonight Show which Jay ruined over 17 years, and I find myself, and everyone who watches a network program, not merely reviewed, but snobbishly eviscerated.

To be called "culturally and intellectually barren" by a writer who opens with the bizarre statement that the stultifyingly boring children's game baseball is "Great Television" is a weird experience. What more "intellectually barren" way to spend time can there be than sitting around watching someone trying to hit a ball with a stick, and every 20 minutes or so, running around a field? it's for people who find watching golf too pulse-pounding.

Then you admit that you haven't even looked at network TV in 11 years. It's like having a novel reviewed by someone who admits they don't read, and then adding "but I watched me sum baseball. It was good 'cause I couldn't reckon who would win." I can do you one better. I haven't CARED who would win a baseball game, or any other sporting event, since I hit puberty and outgrew any interest in children's games.

Jay's show is terrible. I look forward to reading reviews that pick it apart written by people who know what they're blathering about.

[liberalsrheros]

LMAO!

[Charity]

have i told you lately that i love you, tallulah? not in the biblical sense, of course, but darling, you absolutely hit the nail on the head with this reply. my sentiments exactly. and besides, this columnist sounds like he watches more of the network blather than he will own up to.

[CharlesWarner]

You got me. I watch"Mad Men" with my wife and occasionally Jim Lehrer on PBS.

[CharlesWarner]

Since you like scripted shows, I.m sure you're a regular viewer of World Wide Wrestling.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

I'm sorry darling if my "I outgrew all interest in sports at puberty" subtext was too subtle for you to pick up on.

So no, I have NEVER watched any World Wide Wrestling. I do watch a bit of Greco-Roman wrestling on the summer Olympics every 4 years, but only because it so closely resembles gay porn. I pay no attention to who wins or loses.

Besides, I didn't say I "like scripted shows," although I LOVE well-scripted shows. ("Lost" and "Doctor Who," Mmmmmmm.) But I have picked up the ocassional paycheck writing TV, and I have some very good friends who write excellent scripted TV shows. Ken Levine, to mention one. And God knows, Ken shares your inexplicable passion for the living death that is a baseball game.

My point was that I found the passage I quoted above deliberately offensive, and grossly snobbish. Try to keep up.

[AurigaRa]

I found the show boring and stupid
I did like the segment with MIchael Moore because Jay was interviewing MICHAEL MOORE, but I won't be watching Jay any MORE.