Yesterday, I was tipped off to the story about how Bill Nguyen of LaLa had apparently come in to save what is now WOXY.com. In case you're not familiar, that is what was left of the WOXY that previously broadcast on 97.7FM out of Cincinnati, Ohio.

That does appear to be the case, according to a story in today's Cincinnati Enquirer by Lauren Bishop.

In case you were wondering, commenting on my site is still down. I'm basically getting absolutely nailed by comment spam, and it's a bit out of control, ever since I upped to the newer version of MT, blacklist or not.

We're working on a solution - my host and I - and as soon as we get things cleared up a bit more, this'll be updated. In the meantime, if you have anything fun and exciting to share, feel free to drop me a line on IM or at themediadrop (at) gmail (dot) com.

While Don Imus was speaking with MSNBC morning news anchor Amy Robach this morning about his need for Frizz-Ease, producer Bernard McGuirk said, from the booth, "Where's Andrew Cunanan when you need him?"

Wow.

From the stupid captions department, we find this example of a description of a fight breaking out in the middle of the Washington Capitals and Philadelphia Flyers game on Tuesday. It's great that we now know that the Caps' Alexander Ovechkin is "from Russia" when describing him. How fantastic is that.

Stupid. Oh, and Richards is from Kenora, Ontario, which is in Canada. Just sayin'.

News.com's Media blog has an item by Harry Fuller on Monday referencing stats that AdAge had pulled together regarding Howard Stern's current ad value on SIRIUS as opposed to when he was on terrestrial radio. While Fuller is spot on to say that the ads are obviously costing less for the advertiser, the audience is less, CPM is different, and SIRIUS is also taking into consideration its overall subscriber dollars, which traditional radio didn't have to factor in.

Sure, it means that they aren't commanding the same "pound for pound" rates that Stern garnered before based on his show on its own merit, but is that such a terrrible thing? I guess it'd be very different if we had SIRIUS talking about how much they were ruing the fact that they had Stern and weren't making as much cash - in this argument (we all know they're not) - then this would be a different discussion. But we can't just sit here and ignore the fact that subs are PAYING to listen to Stern in the first place.

This, of course, was not overheard in a Viacom chatroom and should be taken as humorously as possible:

ViacomBoardGuy: Like, did you notice that Sumner Redstone is making a lot of money?
ViacomBoardroomDude: No, really? Shocker.
ViacomBoardGuy: Why you gotta be such a hater? I say we give him a pay cut, I mean there's no reason someone working for a monster conglomerate should make a lot of money as far as executives go, right?
ViacomBoardroomDude: Whatevs. I gotta go. Best Week Ever is on.
TomBiro: a/s/l?

While there aren't any specifics, it looks like Viacom is cutting the cash that chairman Sumner Redstone will be snagging.

On Friday, some key news came out about how Tribune Co. is going to handle its own business, but what's most important here isn't that the company is trying to be more productive, but the fact that the company is now up for sale, if you really read between the giant lines that have now been put in front of your face in 800-point type.

Anyone want to contemplate the thought of Tribune being purchased - or split up - in some way? Aside from the fact that the company is worth about $8 billion, according to that WSJ article by Sarah Ellison and Julia Angwin, its assets are across the board parts of our economy, from newspapers that are nationally known down to (or up to, depending on your perspective) the Chicago Cubs. Heck, it wouldn't surprise me to see some entrepreneurial group of Cubs fans who go out on a limb asking for a sale just so their preferred team can bring in some ownership that will create a winner, if that's even possible. I mean, baseball curses have to die sometime, right?

Yesterday, I had caught more wind of this story about how Howard Stern was "thinking" about moving back to terrestrial radio from satellite. Of course, this should be completely dismissed unless all satellites happen to be hit with a giant meteor and knocked out or orbit, leaving us all incommunicado. It wouldn't at all surprise me if something similar to what his fellow satellite radio guys ended up doing - Opie and Anthony - where their show is rebroadcast, sans a lot of the things they couldn't say over the airwaves, over various stations because there was a need for some different content, given that two of the bigger shows as far as syndication went were off the air for some time, but that's about it.

Facing financial issues, most likely, the San Diego Union-Tribune announced today that it would bring in, or as it is referred to, "consolidate" in the operations of Today's Local News, a free paper in north San Diego. That is to say, that The Copley Press Inc., the parent of both publications, saw a need to bring the two publications together for staffing and efficiency purposes.

The Baltimore Sun has named Rondra Matthews, who currently publishes the Daily Press from Newport News, Virginia, publisher, reports that paper's Andrea Walker.

With Tuesday's announcement that Time Warner was looking to off up to 18 magazine titles it currently owns, some less than a decade after buying them in the first place, followed by the New York Times Co. stating that it was interested in selling the nine television stations that it owns, what's a buyer to think?

It's not as if they're shedding companies and brands that don't purely meet core competencies, at least not totally. Sure, the NYTCo does a good amount of business in print, but it was always aspirational to own a television station or nine, wasn't it? As for Time Warner, they're obviously in the broadcast biz, and still in the print biz, but they're ditching out on certain areas.

In the NYTCo-related piece by Sarah Ellison and Brooks Barnes, the third graf is what's most important:

The move highlights an issue other media companies are grappling with: While newspapers and television used to complement each other because advertising slumps wouldn't always hit each sector simultaneously, the Internet is now hurting both, as consumers and ad dollars flee to the Web.

Complimentary was the way of a few years ago, but it looks like the Web is now swiping viewer/readership, not adding value to it. Is this a cost issue, where the Web is free for most things (then again, so is most television, except you, most of the time, have to watch the advertisements, sans DVRs), or is it the cost to produce? I've said a few times that if you started a New York Times-ish publication up today, with some decent capital, and only published online, you could do it for a lot less than you publish the print version for, which the change you spill out of your pocket to pay for a daily issue of is more of a token than actual payment towards what it took to print it - that's what advertising is for. But would it truly scale down enough? Sure, you'd still need a newsroom of sorts, but you don't need everything. In fact, you might be able to scale a lot of it out virtually.

What'd be awesome is to take a look at the backend of a situation like Engadget, which has a slew of writers, covering every new tech release, for the most part, of any note. Obviously having been a writer for a few years now on the Weblogs, Inc. network (now owned by AOL) I'm privy to some of the workflow, but having never written or been a part of Engadget I really can't say. Is part of Time Warner's overall thought process on how these various publications now don't fit into their scheme of things partly, maybe even one iota, because of the Weblogs, Inc. sites that they brought in a year ago?

Now don't get me wrong, this isn't meant to be blog triumphalism or anything, I'm just curious. It's not every day that someone says that Parenting and Popular Science need to scoot.

Word is from Reuters that two new NBC shows - "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" and "Twenty Good Years" - will be up on aol.com a week before their television debut. I'm sure that has nothing to do with quite a few reviews getting up online in advance of the airing on the medium screen, right?

[9/11/06 3:18pm] And, here you go - Studio 60.

For anyone who's been blogging for awhile, you're probably familiar with the volume of pitches and other materials that have begun landing in your inbox from public relations professionals (and some not-so-professionals), especially in the last year or so. As someone whose day job it is to work with clients and our own business on developing relationships with online outlets and writers, working with them in a manner that is good for everyone, I'm able to shed light on a daily basis on what works and what doesn't, based almost exclusively on the fact that I've been at this whole blogging thing for a few years now. Something that I'm a fan of explaining to my colleagues and anyone else who asks is that to get the attention of bloggers that you're trying to reach out to, you need to a) personalize what you send to them, no mass-mails will do, b) actually show that you've read what the writer(s) have written in the past, especially if they've covered your company / client, or competitors, and c) stand out from the rest of the pack.

What's this all about? Well, about a month ago, I was contacted by someone at Sony Pictures Television, who commented on this blog, and noted that the company was going to be sending out a mailer to some bloggers, and that they were interested in sending me something if I would like to receive it. I'd accepted, and was expecting to see perhaps a screener or some basic press materials, something that I do receive on a regular basis, most of which I either pass on to other bloggers who might cover those spaces, or I pick up over at TV Squad if someone else hasn't already. A short while later, during a week of business travel, I came home to a package that I wasn't expecting to receive, as I had blanked on the fact that I had corresponded with SPT on this issue when I arrived, so it was a pleasant surprise. Next up comes where the whole "stand out from the crowd" came from in this situation.

So, as I opened up the box, I found a letter describing what was in the box - which was bigger than those that usually contain screeners, mind you - which included a Sony PSP, but not just any PSP, one that contained high-res images and interviews from three of Sony Pictures Television's new shows for the fall season, including "'Til Death," which features Brad Garrett of "Everybody Loves Raymond" fame. All these materials were available to be used by those of us who received them, before FOX, NBC, or the CW, or anyone else, was able to publish them. Of course, my receipt of all of this coincided with a vacation, some quirky TMD blog software happenings, and a number of other things, so I missed the exclusivity window, but not everyone did.

So, aside from the fact that this might seem completely outrageous to some people, let's think about the fact that this move, unlike a lot of other "send people stuff and see what happens" campaigns work, makes logical sense. Sony isn't just sending a PSP to people and then giving them access online to screeners and images and whatnot, they're actually using the PSP to show how that device works with different things. Now, I don't have a PSP, or didn't until this point. I do have two console systems, a Sony PlayStation 2 and an XBOX, and a computer capable of gaming, but nothing to take with me. On planes, I usually bring my iPod along, but it's not a video version, and I think the screen's a little small for that considering what that device can do, so I'm not such a fan anyway. Let's just say that watching these interviews on the PSP - which has a nice widescreen view to it - was flat out amazing. The still images of the shows were just like looking at high-res graphics on any computer screen I have, and the UI of the device is astounding. Heck, even connecting to the airport WiFi at Newark Liberty was a snap. And for a product with no keyboard, that's saying a lot, IMHO. So not only has Sony been smart and gotten the shows in the hands of persons who review and write about such things, but they're provided a device that is part of the Sony family of products and services to view it on. So not only am I talking up the PSP, which I hadn't really played with outside of in a store before, but I'm in the cool kids group with my friends who think it's awesome that I've had access to these shows well before they're aired.

There are pro- and con- arguments to whether people who write online should be accepting products such as this, and it's definitely in my own hands whether or not I choose to send it back or not, and I'm sure that people will criticize one way or another. And, to get facts straight, this isn't the first item that's landed in my meatspace inbox, but it's one of only a few that I've actually written something about. Journalism aside for a moment, let's just look at how this was done, and what it gets for Sony's various companies. Sometimes it's all about getting something in the hands of people and just letting it ride. For instance, I was given the opportunity to test out a Sprint phone and all of its' network services earlier in the year, and as someone who was never a fan of the phones they offered or the ability to make calls on the network, I've got to say that I have probably raved to dozens of people about the quality of the Power Vision network that you can get from them, television and all. Same deal here. Attempt to influence people you consider as influential.

On to the television shows, though. I'm not one to usually hit the sitcom scene, especially in the last few years - I just don't find them funny. "'Til Death" does its part to not be yet another show about a married couple by adding the twist of a newlywed couple living nextdoor to Brad Garrett and Joely Fisher's characters, and taking a lot of what worked for Garrett's character on "Raymond," which should help attract the audience that really enjoyed him as a costar on that show. Just as TV Squad's Joel Keller suggests in his review of the premiere, it feels a little more realistic than the average sitcom (no ridiculously built apartments that would never possibly exist here, thankyouverymuch), and offers a little bit of obnoxious behavior that FOX's "War at Home" also prides itself on, though not so "Ferris Bueller-ish" with the cutaways and whatnot. I'd expect this show to stick around, even if people aren't used to going to FOX for this type of comedy.

As far as the other two included programs, I'd say I was much more intrigued by "Kidnapped" than "Runaway," by far. For those of you into the whole TV Squad spiel on shows, you can check out Joel's writeup here as well. What caught me here was almost exclusively the "tone" of the show. It moved along nicely, had a realistic premise, and the cast is flat out fantastic. I'll have to echo Joel's sentiments about the length of this show as far as a season - or multiple seasons - goes, though. How long can this go on? Then again, I totally thought the same thing about FOX's "Prison Break," which not only is still going and in a second season, but made what I thought was a grave error in taking months "off" mid season to allow for other programming to take hold. I'd have thought that would slaughter a show, especially one that was minute-by-minute such as this one. NBC has had a kinda iffy experience with shows that have a take-no-prisoners cast. I mean, "Las Vegas" is amusing to watch, with James Caan, Josh Duhamel, Nikki Cox, Vanessa Marcil, and a host of others (how DID they get them all stuffed in this show, anyway?), but it isn't exactly breaking down doors. Cast doesn't make a full season, but if it did, along with some solid acting, then "Kidnapped" could stick around for awhile as well. Seeing Delroy Lindo, Dana Delaney, Timothy Hutton, and more on the small screen - together - could prove that the big cast formula will work, or could at least become a trend.

Today's Press Kit?
So, does that make this kind of communication and outreach the new style of press kit? Public relations firms and clients themselves have been coming up with creative ways to market their clients to journalists for years, and it's all about getting that particular piece of mail or package opened from the inbox in a timely manner and spark interest. Obviously they're not usually contained in an electronic gaming device - most of the time - but it appears that we've reached a point where certain companies and individuals have chosen to take a big step - no baby steps here - in order to catch the attention of those that they feel can push the needle. With those individuals not bound by the tenets of journalism, for the most part, that leaves some grey area that can be worked around. I'm not expecting any big screen televisions to start showing up at the Best Week Ever blog anytime soon, but I guess you never know.

The AP's David Rising reported this morning that Bertelsmann AG will be selling BMG to Vivendi for more than $2 billion, making Vivendi by far the "largest music publisher by catalog size."

It's unclear if this does anything big that will be seen by the average consumer purchasing music, except for the potential for the "rich get richer" situation to continue on as now Universal Music Group will have even more control over music's overall catalog.

AdAge's Abbey Klaassen informs this morning about the announcement by Viacom that its CEO, Tom Freston, has resigned. He is set to be replaced by Philippe Dauman, currently sitting on the company's board.