Heroes, Zeros and Weirdos

There have been many things I've been meaning to post about in the past month. How much NBC's "Heroes" blows (or does it?). How far NBC's "The Office" is slipping in quality and substance (told you so). How far above expectations NBC's "30 Rock" is consistently delivering (F the haters). And how far up its own butt NBC's "Studio 60" continues to crawl each week (BS site but whatever he agrees) .

With all that out in the open to be harped on again soon, I instead turn my attention to a larger question about the current state of Television as we wrap up the 1st quarter of the viewing season. Specifically the age old quandary of why bad shows out-perform good shows and why good shows have to get cancelled (See: Dateline to replace Friday Night Lights on Tuesday).

Let's start with this year's honoree as "The Best Show You're Not Watching," a dubious achievement formerly awarded to FOX's "Arrested Development." For 2006, it's NBC's "Friday Night Lights." One of the primary reasons I started these posts was to flex my Words Per Minute and defend shows like Friday Night Lights and "Kidnapped," which were clearly too good for network television to sustain. FNL's got its full season pick-up, however, and Kidnapped is wrapped for good after 13.

Another surprisingly solid show hitting its comedic stride during its second season is CBS's "How I Met Your Mother." Even after co-star and scene stealer NPH came out to People a few weeks ago, the show is still pulling in mediocre ratings (despite "Let's Go 2 the Mall" by Robin Sparkles somehow), which begs the question: how bad does a show have to be in order for it to be considered good?

The Office, Heroes, Criminal Minds, NCIS, Two and a Half Men, the list goes on and on of mediocre shows that find mass audiences through their watered down, accessible substance. Who's to blame? The networks for not sticking by fledgling franchises? The networks for not putting enough corporate muscle behind the commercial promotion of new, edgier shows? The public for not caring enough about television to waste time to wade through the bevy of new shows and gravitate toward the best and brightest? The writers and producers themselves who are too out of touch to be both relevant and engrossing?

Who knows. All I know is Seinfeld was successful and remains one of the greatest shows in the past 20 years. Who knows where it would stand in today's TV climate. Who knows how many times I'll say "who knows" in succession as a poor attempt at parallel structure? If it were to air today Seinfeld probably wouldn't receive the acclaim of "Worst Show For Some Reason You Are Watching." Nope. That shit would still go to Heroes.