October 2009 – Page 2

October 4, 2009April 27, 2011

Gourmet Magazine – R.I.P.

Sad news today for foodies who have way too much time on their hands. Gourmet Magazine, the magazine that showed all of us hack-chef-wannabees that we had no chance of ever being any good, is going out of business. [I mean, seriously, look at that picture – who can possibly make that? It’s hard enough just ordering pizza.]

The print business is living a nightmare. Conde Nast also announced they are axing three other titles (Cookie, Modern Bride and Elegant Bride). The publishing business model, as it stands today, is truly fucked up but Gourmet has a different problem. It is a victim of its own name.

Gourmet is a top-notch magazine to be sure and its Editor-In-Chief Ruth Reichel is one of the classiest and most talented publishing executives in the business (and one hell of a good cook).

The problem with Gourmet, in this economic climate, is its title. The middle and lower income people that purchased a subscription for $1 an issue finally gave up on the dream of having 5-star restaurant food in their apartment. It just wasn’t practical in the overall scheme of things. It’s the equivalent of reading a copy of Yachting when you have no idea if you’re going to have a job next year – much less… a yacht. Scary stuff.

Bon Appetit and Food & Wine are scraping by (maybe) but only because their generic titles allow them to have cover stories like 10 (Great) Wines for Under $10 Bucks, and Feed Your Family For Less Than 5 Cents A Day. The best Gourmet could do was Eat Like A King On A Prince’s Salary (or something like that).

The good news is the website (which includes the fabulous Epicurious.com) and TV show will continue (I didn’t know there was a TV show – but good luck with that).

I wish the Ruth Reichl and her entire staff the best of luck as they try to move forward. It’s a fucked up world and nothing is fair right now.

Once we start extending the OnMedea brand into the food & wine area, I’ll be looking for a few good writers. But you may need to learn how to make a grilled cheese first.

Jill Kennedy – OnMedea

October 2, 2009April 28, 2011

Going Rogue by Sarah Palin (AND LYNN VINCENT)

The cover of Sarah Palin’s latest work of fiction “Going Rogue: An American Life” was released today by publisher HarperCollins.

Anyone waiting to see if Ms. Palin can write in complete sentences WON’T be able to find that out anytime soon because she didn’t really write the book. Most likely she talked into a speaker phone from her Chevy Suburban to Ghost Writer Lynn Vincent who turned Ms. Palin’s incoherent thoughts into a simple, easy-to-understand prose that will further separate the growing division in America.

What do we know about Lynn Vincent? Not much lately. I have a feeling Ms. Vincent has been locked in Dick Cheney’s bunker and will remain there until “Going Rogue: An American Life” is safely in the $1 bins at Costco (or when Ms. Palin becomes President – whichever comes first).

What we DO know about Lynn Vincent (46) OFF-THE-RECORD is that she is a total Christian Right wacko with hardcore beliefs about abortion, gay marriage, Jews, Democrats, Muslims, etc. In general, she’s a woman with a deep hatred in her heart for all those who are not like her.

ON THE RECORD, she’s a fairly solid writer who (I’m sure) has gay and Muslim friends. OK, maybe gay friends. OK, in the closet gay friends. OK, maybe not.

Over the next few weeks (until the book is released in November), there will be numerous attempts by the “Illegal-should-be-abolished” media on the left to dig up more about Ms. Vincent. But I have a feeling she will be “unavailable for comment” (though Fox News may be able to land an “Exclusive”. Hannity will be “tough but fair” and manage to wring out what her favorite flavor of Jell-o is).

As tempting as it is to go after whatever low-hanging fruit there is on Ms. Vincent, I say the real focus should remain on Ms. Palin – who, frankly, must be stopped.

Somewhere buried in the digital universe there is further proof that she is completely out of her mind and… dangerous. For the good of the world, it is our duty to dig it up before she writes again.

Jill Kennedy – OnMedea

P.S. – Sarah, you should have gone more “Coulter” with your cover. The men want to see you in a black mini-dress (especially Sean Hannity and his repressed sexual urges).

October 1, 2009April 28, 2011

The Jay Leno Show Has Failed

Based on last night’s overnight ratings (September 30, 2009: 4.1/7), the above headline is what nearly every television production executive is screaming down the halls today (with the exception of those at NBC Universal. They’re probably screaming something like… Will Comcast contribute to my 401K? What happens to our stock options?, etc.).

Now, a 4.1/7 is a grand slam on The CW. If every show on The CW got a 4.1/7, Dawn Ostroff (President) would be carried around on one of those Cleopatra-type chairs. However, this is NBC and this is Jay Leno. We’ve heard from stories past (lies in my opinion), that Jay only needs to “get a 1.5 rating (A18-49) to make $300 million a year for NBC”. So a 4.1/7 is comfortably in that range – but still pathetic based on pre-season expectations.

However, there is a way that NBC can save face in the middle of this debacle. They don’t even need to cancel The Jay Leno Show (why would you when you’re making that kind of bank? I’m sure Comcast will do a complete audit in due-diligence – so one day we’ll know for sure).

Here’s what you do, NBC: BUY BILLBOARDS strategically-positioned around every major television production facility (as demonstrated below). Every week, update the profit number of The Jay Leno Show and then put a tag at the bottom that reads something like: “Hey TV Execs, how are your fall shows doing? Throwing Off Any Cash?”

This would bring home the fact that The Jay Leno Show HAS NOT FAILED. It might just stop this town from obsessing over ratings and fucking market share. Ask The Food Network about their profits? I think they’ll tell you they’re doing just fine. And when was the last time they got even a 1.0/3 share? It means nothing.

But, NBC, you have lost the PR war and it’s time to fight back. Forget trying to put TV stars from other networks on with Jay. Jay is about movie stars and pop icons. Fuck Julianna Margulies, Jay. You don’t need her or her TV friends and complaining in the media about it makes you look like a pussy (even more so).

Jill Kennedy – OnMedea

P.S. – I have nothing against Julianna Margulies. Big fan. She’s just F-ed by example.

October 1, 2009April 29, 2011

Comcast Acquires NBC Universal?

“COMCAST DENIES A DEAL IS DONE, BUT DOES NOT DENY TALKS.” Are you really fucking kidding me, Sharon?

So this is the way it’s going to be? Semantics.

Everyone in the world with a blog could report anything (anything) and find a way to call it a true story.

My five-year-old daughter could tell me she knows where Iran is hiding a nuclear bomb and I could report: “A trusted source tells me that Iran is hiding a nuclear bomb in a closet in La Canada.” I do consider my daughter to be “trusted”. She’s the “source”. Iran would come out immediately and call the story “inaccurate” – but I wouldn’t be a liar.

I’m stunned that nobody calls bullshit on a story that mentions quite a few details about a deal that is far from complete.

Yet nobody calls Sharon Waxman at TheWrap.com a liar. Semantics. Or… I suppose, because nobody really cares. TheWrap.com got everything it needed from this story. National exposure. Who cares if it’s “inaccurate”? That’s not the point.

Comcast and GE get everything they want out of the story – a test of the market to see what the rumor, if true, would do to their stock prices.

Even so, it’s absolutely ridiculous.

“Comcast is in talks to buy the entertainment giant NBC Universal from General Electric… ACCORDING TO KNOWLEDGEABLE INDIVIDUALS.” WTF does that mean? I consider myself to be a “knowledgeable individual” – does that mean I could have been a source even if I didn’t know about the meeting?

“Deal points were hammered out…EXECUTIVES FAMILIAR WITH THE MEETING SAID.”

Who are these “Knowledgeable Individuals” and “Executives Familiar With The Meeting” – and why the fuck are they talking to TheWrap.com?

Are “Sources” protected in online journalism? What kind of a crazy-fucking world is it when Nikki Finke is the reserved one in a big entertainment business story like this? Maybe it’s because she didn’t break the story and would love to see it discredited. Actually, not “maybe” – I’m sure she wants to see it discredited.

The biggest surprise of all is that nobody is calling bullshit or lies lies lies. In today’s journalistic environment, that means the story is, most likely, true. And if I had the chance and “sources” to break this story, I would have done the same thing.

Jill Kennedy – OnMedea