Mark_Thompson's Blog

This post has been edited by an administrator

It's still a bad bet, the presidential voting thing. Whichever way we vote we are gonna end up with one of these guys who has had to promise things he cannot deliver; Instill confidence that one knows he should not have instilled; promise a belief in God, the correct God that is, the one that offends the fewest voters that he may or may not have and finally suggest ways out of the economic mess that has engulfed the U.S. and the world economy when we know it's bigger than any solution that can be cooked up on the campaign trail...in fact, the bailout only passed after it was laden with pork favors to waste more tax dollars to buy off votes.

There is concentration in debates and on the campaign trail on taxes which have NOTHING to do with a solution to the fact that the economy is dealing with an unprecedented bleeding and the tourniquet has had to be this massive infusion of cash as just the beginning of the solution.

There is little talk of the war and little talk of the Supreme Court appointments. Those are ongoing issues that the next President can directly influence.

These guys WILL make a difference and can change the course of history. You have seen that in the last 8 years. But my point is twofold. First, the flawed election process (which goes on waaaay too long by the way) reveals little about what they will actually do and secondly, the promises they make and who they appear to be will bear little resemblance to what we may ultimately end up with.

This is not some breakthrough.  In fact, I suppose it's obvious.  On the other hand it does seem to be getting worse  not better.

This does not mean that one shouldn't run to vote. We have so many local issues in California and historic opportunities to make a difference that we should all relish the opportunity to vote. As far as President is concerned though, the corporatocracy and media demonization of candidates within our political system (reflecting a polarity within the new electorate) prevents the sort of change that we really need and prevents the sort of political dialogue in this country that we need to hear to make a decision.

Let's face it, these guys can and will make a difference but do we really know who will do what? I'm not so sure.

Because of an accidental technology glitch the original blog was obliterated but what follows is the essence:

We have been living a false prosperity and a false promise. That promise was essentially that we can all participate in the dream of home ownership and flat screen TVs with a home theater and vacation properties that we never have to really pay for... so even if we didn't make that much money we could afford everything we wanted.

Oh and we can also prosecute the Bloomingdale's of wars in Iraq and never have to really worry about how that's being paid for either.

The purveyors of all of this will indeed need and get the bail out that we now must give them just to sustain what will now be an economy that will do more puffing and wheezing than an emphysema patient in the LA Marathon.

We are willfully complicit in eating up the fabricated loan facts and general economic lies that these mortgage companies and Wall Street firms that lay off the bad debt have served up. But make no mistake about it, it is more the fault of the scoundrels on Wall Street and mortgage companies guilty of fraud and predatory lending than it is the fault of us consumers.

Now the next set of potential half-truths and lies. We are now taking on bad debt as a country and being sold the notion that we might actually "make money" on it. Really? We don't even know what we are "buying". We are getting all the bad debt but somehow it's not so bad that, not even knowing exactly what it is, we should consider the vague promise that we might actually make money on the deal?

Yes we have to do it, but we should attach both oversight and ownership in any recovery. I suspect whatever recovery is ahead, is so far off in the distance if it ever comes that it will be generations before the toxicity of it all is worked out of the economy.

    Did u watch the Emmy's???!!!! 

How bad was that??

That was the worst produced show, filled with the worst ideas for bits that I have EVER seen....I was stunned at how bad the opening was and only Ricky Gervais and Stephen Colbert and finally Rickles rescued it from being a total waste of a night..

If that had been a TV pilot, they would have stopped the screening after 20 minutes and said, "Sorry guys.  This is not going to work". 

How could those reality hosts, some of whom are really talented, think that they could literally go on a big telecast like that and have nothing prepared and simply stand there and stammer and play up that they had nothing and simply waste 5 minutes at the beginning of the show.  Absolutely awful.

Being in the Nokia Theater during the Emmys this year must have been like being in show biz Guantanamo...a true hostage situation.

I appeared on GDLA this morning--as a guest.

What fun.

They are all so genuinely happy and supportive of  the new show which I was there to promote (HOLE IN THE WALL). and regardless of what happens with the show it's so nice when these people with whom I work, both morning and evening ,are so genuinely happy for the new endeavor of a colleague.

Anyway, doing the morning show as a guest was eerily familiar because of my many times filling in for Steve but oddly different because it's a different protocol as a guest.

Fun morning and something to take my mind off this country going straight down the tubes huh?

Time to face the hole.

So much goes into the success of a show.  Promotion is very important but placement on the schedule is perhaps even more important.

For example, you can put any old show after American Idol or the Super Bowl and it will get massive audience sampling and then if it's a decent show it will get that audience to come back week after week.

With my new show "Hole In the Wall" (Thursdays at 8p on Fox) we have been starved for promotion but had a decent rating after a sneak preview episode on Sunday.

So now it comes down to Thursday @ 8 and with no lead-in (strong show before us) and marginal awareness of the show and no solid promo schedule....I'm nnnervous.

Still, because Hole In The Wall performed so well on Sunday and because the show is funny and one the whole family can get into I am optimistic that it will get traction if not right away then slowly.

I hope you enjoy it if you should happen to have a chance to check it out.

All comments are welcome... I may as well say that since I know you will leave them for me anyway :)

“HOLE IN THE WALL” Premieres September 11 on FOX

Story Created: Aug 8, 2008

Story Updated: Aug 8, 2008 

HOLE IN THE WALL, the body-bending, mind-twisting, global game show phenomenon from AMERICAN IDOL producers FremantleMedia North America, will premiere Thursday, Sept. 11 (8:00-9:00 PM ET/PT) on FOX.



HOLE IN THE WALL became an instant ratings success story on-air and online after launching on Japan’s Fuji TV in July 2006, where it continues to rank No. 1 in its timeslot. The format swiftly created waves around the world, with FremantleMedia currently producing versions in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Colombia, Denmark, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Sweden and the U.K.



Hosted by Brooke Burns (“Dog Eat Dog”) and Mark Thompson (“Guinness World Records: Primetime”), HOLE IN THE WALL is one of the trickiest, fastest, funniest and wettest shows on the planet where speed, agility and a hearty sense of humor are essential tools to survive. During each episode, two teams of three compete against each other in multiple rounds of play, facing various barrier walls speeding toward them with weird and wacky cut-out shapes. Each team must contort their bodies individually or in unison to fit through the wall or be swept away into a pool below. As players struggle to strike a pose, points – and dignity – can be easily lost with a simple miscalculation. As the rounds progress and the pace heats up, mind over matter, quick thinking, coordination, agility and clever teamwork play a crucial role as each team strives to maneuver through walls literally closing in on them. The team with the most points at the end of the competition will win $25,000 and the chance to face the dreaded “Blind Wall” for the opportunity to win an additional $100,000.

I need you, and everyone you have ever met to watch my new show HOLE IN THE WALL. 
I really think you will be entertained and the whole family can watch.  Even if you don't speak english you can get and enjoy this show.  
Come to think of it, I'm far more tolerable on television if you do not speak english.
Thanks for your help everybody!!


Fox schedules Hole in the Wall against Survivor

Fox announced today that it was going to take Moment of Truth off the fall schedule and replace it with its new import, Hole in the Wall, a game show that involves nothing more than people trying to jump through differently shaped holes in a styrofoam wall that will knock them into a pool if they don’t make it.

That’s significant because Fox planned to use its lie detector show to kill off Survivor. Now, the new Fox game show debuts Sept. 11 at 8 p.m. ET, and one week later, Survivor Gabon will debut in the same hour.

This is probably bad news for Survivor. Hole in the Wall already has a cult following online (check out the “human Tetris” videos on YouTube), and the novelty of a fun new game show versus a familiar reality show might affect ratings, at least initially. 

Plus, Moment of Truth was both soulless and ultimately kind of boring because it was so disingenuous, pretending it wasn’t so soulless. If you’re going to be so callous and destructive, go for it, don’t just shut off the cameras after destroying families. Fox’s decision to ditch host Mark Wahlberg’s show (for now) is clearly strategic. There’s an appetite for happy fun dumb shows right now (hello, Wipeout).

More significantly, as The Hollywood Reporter notes, Moment of Truth’s “ratings [dropped] sharply during its summer run, [so] ‘Hole’ likely will stand a better chance of overthrowing CBS’ time-period champ.”

What a wild summer it is in California. Dry lightning and other sources having ignited half the state.

As for us in SoCal, the Santa Ana season is not even here yet.  Our horror show begins in the latter part of August into the fall typically.

After a dry season like the one we have had, it'll be up to homeowners to do the brush clearing and all the other stuff we hear about. Then it will be up to nature to give us a break. Finally, we have to hope that the fire freaks are not out this season.

It's an interesting fact that increasingly the way in which fires are fought and communities evacuated is being re-thought.

There is evidence that the evacuation techniques employed by different communities, while effectively saving lives, may not save the most property.  Owners may actually have a shot at helping to save their own homes. 

I always thought those people were crazy for staying behind (and some may be) but in the following interview with an Arizona State professor and fire fighting expert he explains the contrary.  those people may represent the only shot  at saving their house that there really is.

Check it out and tell me what you think.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92
372857

This post has been edited by an administrator

Okay all you don't worry, be happy peeps...here's the latest thing to throw to the side and not worry about...water. :)

The population of the west has exploded at a rate so staggering that water resources are stressed beyond what the region can bare.

Conservation is part of the solution, but it's unlikely that without substantial solutions to supplement conservation along the lines of desalination plants, and the expansion of gray water use, etc. we will not be able to attack this problem effectively and it will grow in magnitude to eclipse the problems we have with fuel.

There is profligate waste of water here and across the west, from Las Vegas to Arizona, don't we need to consider ways to draw down our per capita use of water in the west.

Just a quick thought.

 Well, I uh...geez...um...I just presumed that  I would be the ONLY one featured, but okay....I share the ink (to say the least) with a few others.

Here's the LA Weekly piece that features me and those OTHER people who do what I do  :)

http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/sunny-and-mild-gettin
g-to-know-our-fair-weather-friends-of-local-news/19030/

It was some time ago that I blogged about what I had heard from a leading surgeon regarding cell phones and brain tumor growth.

You may recall that I had mentioned being told that while he had no definite results, it was that doctor's opinion that there is a correlation between cell phone use and brain tumors he had seen.

The overwhelming numbers of tumors had occurred on the side of the head to which the person holds the cell phone he told me.

Well, if you read the article from this week's New York Times, below, it is all detailed there:

Experts Revive Debate Over Cellphones and Cancer function 

What do brain surgeons know about cellphone safety that the rest of us don’t?

Last week, three prominent neurosurgeons told the CNN interviewer Larry King that they did not hold cellphones next to their ears. “I think the safe practice,” said Dr. Keith Black, a surgeon at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, “is to use an earpiece so you keep the microwave antenna away from your brain.”

Dr. Vini Khurana, an associate professor of neurosurgery at the Australian National University who is an outspoken critic of cellphones, said: “I use it on the speaker-phone mode. I do not hold it to my ear.” And CNN’s chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon at Emory University Hospital, said that like Dr. Black he used an earpiece.

Along with Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s recent diagnosis of a glioma, a type of tumor that critics have long associated with cellphone use, the doctors’ remarks have helped reignite a long-simmering debate about cellphones and cancer.

That supposed link has been largely dismissed by many experts, including the American Cancer Society. The theory that cellphones cause brain tumors “defies credulity,” said Dr. Eugene Flamm, chairman of neurosurgery at Montefiore Medical Center.

According to the Food and Drug Administration, three large epidemiology studies since 2000 have shown no harmful effects. CTIA — the Wireless Association, the leading industry trade group, said in a statement, “The overwhelming majority of studies that have been published in scientific journals around the globe show that wireless phones do not pose a health risk.”

The F.D.A. notes, however, that the average period of phone use in the studies it cites was about three years, so the research doesn’t answer questions about long-term exposures. Critics say many studies are flawed for that reason, and also because they do not distinguish between casual and heavy use.

Cellphones emit non-ionizing radiation, waves of energy that are too weak to break chemical bonds or to set off the DNA damage known to cause cancer. There is no known biological mechanism to explain how non-ionizing radiation might lead to cancer.

But researchers who have raised concerns say that just because science can’t explain the mechanism doesn’t mean one doesn’t exist. Concerns have focused on the heat generated by cellphones and the fact that the radio frequencies are absorbed mostly by the head and neck. In recent studies that suggest a risk, the tumors tend to occur on the same side of the head where the patient typically holds the phone.

Like most research on the subject, the studies are observational, showing only an association between cellphone use and cancer, not a causal relationship. The most important of these studies is called Interphone, a vast research effort in 13 countries, including Canada, Israel and several in Europe.

Some of the research suggests a link between cellphone use and three types of tumors: glioma; cancer of the parotid, a salivary gland near the ear; and acoustic neuroma, a tumor that essentially occurs where the ear meets the brain. All these cancers are rare, so even if cellphone use does increase risk, the risk is still very low.

Last year, The American Journal of Epidemiology published data from Israel finding a 58 percent higher risk of parotid gland tumors among heavy cellphone users. Also last year, a Swedish analysis of 16 studies in the journal Occupational and Environmental Medicine showed a doubling of risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma after 10 years of heavy cellphone use.

“What we’re seeing is suggestions in epidemiological studies that have looked at people using phones for 10 or more years,” says Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News, an industry publication that tracks the research. “There are some very disconcerting findings that suggest a problem, although it’s much too early to reach a conclusive view.”

Some doctors say the real concern is not older cellphone users, who began using phones as adults, but children who are beginning to use phones today and face a lifetime of exposure.

“More and more kids are using cellphones,” said Dr. Paul J. Rosch, clinical professor of medicine and psychiatry at New York Medical College. “They may be much more affected. Their brains are growing rapidly, and their skulls are thinner.”

For people who are concerned about any possible risk, a simple solution is to use a headset. Of course, that option isn’t always convenient, and some critics have raised worries about wireless devices like the Bluetooth that essentially place a transmitter in the ear.

The fear is that even if the individual risk of using a cellphone is low, with three billion users worldwide, even a minuscule risk would translate into a major public health concern.

“We cannot say with any certainty that cellphones are either safe or not safe,” Dr. Black said on CNN. “My concern is that with the widespread use of cellphones, the worst scenario would be that we get the definitive study 10 years from now, and we find out there is a correlation.”

well@nytimes.com

Two friends of mine died this week. Cancer took both these relatively young men.

The first is Tom Groener. You do not know the face but perhaps know his voice.   His signature deadpan "hello" and dialogue done with that unmistakable flat everyman quality generally made him a top commercial voiceover actor.

Cut and paste this link and you can hear some of him:

http://vbfile1.voicebank.net/sandboxes/11/Actors%20-%20
Commercial/Tom%20Groener.mp3

Tom, will be missed by all who had the pleasure to both work with him and even be around him in a studio waiting area. He was a great guy who made me smile.

The second friend of mine who died suddenly after a year struggling with cancer is Glen Gerberg.

Glen was a weather forecaster in Denver Colorado for years and had the quietest, easy going temperament, even as the world around him was coming to pieces.

I knew Glen and spent time with him at meteorology conferences (which I used to attend more regularly years ago) and we grew to be pretty good friends.

In fact, I saw Glen for dinner here in Los Angeles three months ago and got the word over the weekend that he had only weeks to live. I was stunned of course.

When I called him up he sounded fine. He was lucid and focused on his daughter's high school graduation. We spoke of her future at Berkeley and beyond and only made a broad brushed reference to his health.

He was dead the next day.

I guess all the cliches and hackneyed expressions are true about living for today and telling the people you love that you love them. But in the end, isn't all of that dwarfed by the reality of loss associated with talented, good people who were cheated out of some of the great days of their lives?

In the very beginning of it's run AMERICAN IDOL was a huge hit but still looked at by some in the recording industry as a bit "cheesy" or "mainstream".  Eventually, that wore off (you may differ with me but I think it took about two seasons).

When Prince appeared at an Idol finale it should have told everyone that Idol had arrived on every level.  Now the coolest mega-artists and producers are "angling" to get on the show for the most part.

Plus, major studios, actors, publicists and performers are jamming in the door to get their stuff on the show in any way possible.

It's been a win-win.  Good for the artists and good for Idol. 

And so tonight we benefited from a more mature Idol and we see all of this come together....

The Idol finale had a tip of the hat to older artists like Graham Nash, Donna Summer and George Michael and newer  phenoms like the Jonas Brothers.

This finale was the very best since Kelly Clarkson (season one).  It had everything from humor and fun performances like the "friends forever" number to a genuine overwhelming surprise ending.

David Cook clearly benefited from yet another Idol phenomenon.  Audience backlash against the judges.  After the apparent "coronation" of David Archuleta the night before the audience rose up and cranked out a whopping 12 million extra votes for Cook to give him a convincing win. 

It was terrific.

The outcome was such a forgone conclusion that you almost felt guilty tuning in to the finale to see what the judges had told us the night before.  And then....and then, the best finish we've yet seen and the Idol honor given to a genuinely sincere and grateful guy whose emotion at the end of the night said it all.

Congratulations to David Cook and all those who put together a great night.

This post has been edited by an administrator

I don't get it...you can believe it or not, but the fact is Jay Leno is dominating Letterman and Kimmel in key demos during late night.

I'm not necessarily a Leno fan or detractor but I certainly don't see how the network justifies cutting him loose when he's leading the ratings field in dominant fashion.

Now, the fact may be that NBC thinks Conan can command the same audience more or less, but if you are NBC, when you are winning the game so handily, why would you turn Leno loose???? Why not cut Conan a check for 40 million--his penalty if not given the show (which you will make up in 2 months of Leno's show) and march on into the next decade.

Am I missing something??? All you armchair execs help me please :)

If you and I had a business and it was run as poorly as the deadbeats we have sent to Washington are running the business of our country we would have a quick meeting and agree to throw them out on their backsides....and it's not specific to either political party.

$ 9 , 3 5 9 , 9 2 7 , 9 7 6 , 8 8 6 . 5 6 is the national debt as of this writing and for those who cannot get accustomed to choking down sick numbers, that's a 9 TRILLION dollar number.

The dirty secret is that sick number is not even the real deficit. It is a Treasury Dept put your best foot forward number that conceals the REAL DEFICIT. Yes, the real budget deficit....the debts we are going to have to pay long after these jerks who are living high on the tax payer hog leave their cush gigs in D.C. is a much higher number.

Call it the IMPLIED NATIONAL DEBT if you prefer. It's the true liability of the United States of America. That is, not only the Treasury bills, notes and bonds we sell to finance our annual deficit and past deficits. But all the promises we've made to make payments in the future...you know, Medicare and Social Security, etc.

That's how you get a ridiculous $55 trillion national debt.

Even with a war that has us hemorrhaging money (and, by the way, running up bills for the treatment of an entire generation of war torn soldiers with head traumas that will cause massive debilitating problems and expensive therapy for decades to come), the war is NOT the biggest weight on this country's economic future. The biggest problem is health care costs that are spiraling so quickly they will turn this once great nation into back of the parade carcass of what it once was.

Ask of your candidates what they plan to do about this. Usually you can get the best info on their websites because in this superficial culture the debates are increasingly about things like gays marrying and gun control.

Unless you are charging gays 40 billion per marriage and each gun owner 2 billion per gun they own, those issues ain't gonna protect us from being ground into dust by the death star of debt.

Let's get focused on the right stuff and get out of this mess.