Promotions in motion.

This was the second straight episode of The Middle, starring the wonder (politically Conservative) Patricia Heaton, who is even better in this role than she was as Deborah on Everybody Loves Raymond, in which the premise of the show is that Heaton’s character is engrossed by another ABC show. Last time it was The Oscars, airing later that week on ABC. This time it was The Bachelor.

I should note that I was a proponent of NBC’s long-ago crossover deployments, including Kramer appearing on Mad About You and the “Phoebe” from Friends and her twin sister (also from Mad About You). That, to me, was clever – the thought that the characters of NBC shows all resided within the same reality.

But in the ABC model, this wasn’t a character from one show interacting with that of another. It was a character watching a show on the same network. I mean, they would’ve had a lot of credibility if Heaton’s character were addicted to Survivor or Amazing Race or any other non-ABC reality show.

But that’s not what the world of Disney-ABC-ESPN is about, sadly.

Speaking of NBC, I have to give them kudos in this realm because if there’s one show which references shows on other networks more than any other I’ve noticed it’s Tina Fey’s 30 Rock – which of course also parodies the NBC Network on a weekly basis in an effective manner.

Nevertheless, when it comes to cross-promotional content in entertainment programming, they all do it, though perhaps none quite like ABC.

America <3s train wrecks.

After I saw the ads for the latest installment of Celebrity Apprentice, I had to check Wikipedia to find out when the last time we had a non-celebrity Apprentice. It goes all the way back to 2007, apparently.

Now, I understand that Trump at some point maybe wasn’t in need of anymore real apprentices – apparently he thought the show had run its course even before his TV contract had expired. I also acknowledge that the celebrity version raises money for charity, which is a good thing.

However, it seems to be a microcosm of the increasing focus on Hollywood celebrities within our culture. Not only do we have programs solely focused on Entertainment, like Inside Edition and ET, but the morning and afternoon talk shows focus on movie promos and other celeb installments. On top of that, the actual news seems more focused than ever on covering entertainment. I mean, the AP hourly radio updates probably dedicate as much time to covering entertainment news as they do non-entertainment news. Really? There’s so much they AREN’T reporting on that’s important, yet they devote their time to entertainment – as if they’re filling a niche that’s not already fully covered by other outlets?

Now, in the case of Dancin’ with the Stars, they cut out the middleman and simply began with the premise that people would tune in not to see regular people engaged in a dance competition, but only those with celebrity status. This year we’re also seeing the crossover of “reality” stars included in the contest. I believe I heard that one contestant is a “real housewife” from whichever city; ugh!

Also, not unlike when Law and Order SVU shot an episode with Mike Tyson and then billed it as a “controversial” episode, Dancin’ with the Stars is including the volatile in-and-out-of-rehab character Andy Dick as a competitor. AP radio reported on this, hook line and sinker – they took the bait like the dolts they are. They noted the risk in including Dick because you never know when he might embarrass himself with a self-destruction.

Um, yeah – as if a Dick implosion wasn’t the sole and contrived reason for including him in the first place. Why else would they invite him? They’ll be disappointed if he doesn’t implode.

Anyway, the time where other competitive shows like Survivor, Amazing Race and Top Chef replace regular competitors with celebrities. It’s really no different than what the Biography channel and the like have done with their biography programs. They used to be about important figures in history, science, culture, etc. – today they are all focused on celebrity bios.

Because we as a society are that hung up on entertainment celebrities.

It’s a simple question, Seth.

For the week leading up to the Oscars telecast, ABC hijacked many of its programs into forced promo premise around the upcoming Oscars. This included at least two shows which depicted TV families gathered on the sofa to watch the Oscars, as if it were Leave it to Beaver or I Love Lucy or Ozzie and Harriet. 

Was this supposed to suggest that the Oscars would be a telecast suitable for family viewing? 

Because, as expected, it wasn’t. 

I predicted that Seth MacFarlane’s commentary would be laced with sexual innuendo inappropriate for family viewing. I was right; I concede that’s no feat worthy of accolades. 

Look no further than practically any network primetime TV show and ask yourself if it’s family-friendly. Watch about 30 seconds of CBS’ Two and a Half Men – for example – which, in my market begins at 7:30 PM (in most of the country it airs at 8:30. You may as well just rent a porno and show it to your kids. 

Look no further than Super Bowl halftime shows where Timberlake dry-humps Janet Jackson before ripping off part of her clothing or the content of half the Super Bowl advertisements for your definition of what Hollywood and the entertainment community views as family entertainment.

I see Ellen has a daytime show featuring men parading in their undewear. Good thing the kids will be in school.

But here’s the thing: ABC would never cede my point that this approach was fraudulent. To them, last night’s show was a family-friendly show, even with its references to boobs and Hollywood orgies. This, to them, is perfectly appropriate family content. 

So here’s what bothers me the most. To the Hollywood crowd, all the sex talk and fornication scenes of womanizing bachelors and women getting their grooves on is good for America. They believe, open talk about sex is what we need. 

So let me ask those of you who subscribe to this premise: how many date rapes were there back when Leave It to Beaver ruled primetime? How many STDs? How many single moms? How many aborted babies… compared to today? 

I am so sick of Hollywood lecturing us on how we need more government control over our lives when they won’t change a thing about how their immoral views are destroying the country. 

About the only pop culture attempt to apologize for the sexual revolution to which I can point was the scene in Austin Powers where he claims that if they’d known the consequences to sexual liberation they’d have done it differently but the spirit would’ve been the same (whatever that means). 

Not good enough, Hollywood. YOU and your values have so adversely impacted our culture. How dare you lecture us on anything when you are more culpable for America’s problems than any other group.