Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

    I don't watch any of those shows but from the clips I see and and skits that find a way to make it to my eyes, Kimmel (and his show) is by far the most entertaining of the late night crowd.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

      Onto the present...
      I thought Jay was all for this latest handoff and ready to retire from a regular late night gig. If he's not then I'm not sure what to say. After debacle #1, and still strong in the ratings, I'd think he'd have all the power in the world to tell NBC brass he's not interested in talking about leaving the show until he's ready to leave the show.

      So if they did come to him, and if he did just roll over, well... wow.... That's hard to believe now.

      That said, I think Fallon is immensely more qualified for the Tonight Show gig than O'Brien. O'Brien's schtick just didn't play well at 11:30 and he also seemed too awkward and probably self-censoring. His best shows that I saw were the shows where his leaving was basically a done deal. Fallon is really the closest to Carson that I think I've seen of all the potential names that have been out there since the last days of Carson. O'Brien was always going to alienate some of the 11:30 crowd. I don't really think Fallon will.

      But this all assumes Jay goes away with a smile. If Jay is being forced out then it's going to be hard for his fans to accept anyone new behind the desk.

      As for 'why' NBC would want to do this all again, I'm going to assume it's based on demographic ratings and not overall ratings. Plus I think NBC brass probably see Fallon as someone actually able to attract the coveted demographic they crave plus see him as a much better fit than O'Brien. IOW, O'Brien's flaws aren't noticeable with Fallon and they do have hindsight to see how O'Brien's flaws were magnified in the 11:30 spot. I think they see a much more comfortable transition with Fallon and I think they see Fallon as much more versatile and talented than Conan.

      In fact after seeing Conan ascend to the big chair I don't think losing him seemed like all that big of a deal to them afterall. OTOH, I think they see Fallon differently. So maybe with everything they learned with the O'Brien debacle maybe they think the idea was right, just not the talent, but think this time it's different.
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
        You would have had to been living under a rock to not know that Conan was hosting the show. No one needed 10 PM lead ins to tell them that.
        Nope, two bedroom townhouse. You misunderstand the point of the lead ins and promos. It's not to let people know who is hosting the show. It's to let people know who the guests are. As successful as Leno's Tonight Show is, they still promote it very heavily. That's because they believe promos will get people to tune in and watch it.

        Did you stop reading your wiki citation before you got to this paragraph? It's what I originally pointed out to you. And why they canned Leno at 10 pm.

        By November 2009, two months after the premiere of The Jay Leno Show in September, ratings for The Tonight Show were down "roughly two million viewers a night year-to-year" from when Leno hosted the program.[26] Though cheaper to produce than the scripted dramas it replaced, Leno's new primetime talk show generated fewer lead-in viewers for local news programs, causing a domino effect on ratings for The Tonight Show and Late Night with Jimmy Fallon.[27]

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

          Originally posted by Strummer View Post
          Nope, two bedroom townhouse. You misunderstand the point of the lead ins and promos. It's not to let people know who is hosting the show. It's to let people know who the guests are. As successful as Leno's Tonight Show is, they still promote it very heavily. That's because they believe promos will get people to tune in and watch it.

          Did you stop reading your wiki citation before you got to this paragraph? It's what I originally pointed out to you. And why they canned Leno at 10 pm.

          But how do you account for the three months of tumbling ratings from June-September before Leno's show even started? You can't blame Conan's crappy summer on Leno.

          Sure, Leno's show didn't do anything to rescue Conan in the fall. I'm not denying that. But the public had already spoken long before that. Conan's Tonight Show was promoted heavily for MONTHS in early 2009 before he took over. People gave him a chance and wanted to check out the new show. But they didn't like what they saw and quickly left. It took just a few weeks for Letterman to start beating him the ratings. Leno's 10 PM show didn't help anything, but Conan lost his viewers long before that. You can blame Leno's show for not doing anything to help him regain an audience, but you cannot blame him for the initial losing of the audience which happened long before the 10 PM show.

          Besides, a ton of people rarely watch the guests because they can't stay up super late. They just want to see the monologue. Besides, as far as lead ins are concerned, hasn't CBS generally had much better prime time shows than NBC in recent years? Yet that doesn't prevent Leno from drawing better than Letterman. People like the host they like and flip over the channel.
          Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-25-2014, 03:54 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

            I remember when Conan took over Late Night. He was an odd choice because he came from a writing background and didn't have much standup experience. Most people didn't even know who he was. I thought he was awkward and had no future. But over time he really settled in to the role. And his show became groundbreaking. A masturbating bear? Comic gold.

            I doubt that anyone will ever match Johnny Carson's legacy. He was great at what he did. He related to the audience better than anyone else has been able to.

            Young Letterman was ground breaking. His show was edgy and unique. And the bits were great. But he's older now and shooting for a different audience. He's on the downside of his popularity and no longer doing anything new.

            Leno is vanilla and appeals to the masses. Of course that brings in good ratings but he's never really contributed to the genre. That makes for a successful show but I don't watch shows just because they have good ratings.

            I find Craig Ferguson really entertaining. He relates to his guests better than any of the others. It's fun seeing him talk to a star about whatever without the star just doing material. It's not over produced and scripted like the other shows. But I think he has a narrower set of guests to select from because a lot of stars just go on those shows to promote. They're not comfortable with Craig's "let's chat and be silly" format.

            I tried Fallon a time or two but wasn't impressed. His interviews seemed very formulaic. It was greet, show the clip, where you gonna be next, thanks for coming. But maybe he's improved upon that now. I'll give him another look when he takes over for Jay. I definitely liked him on SNL.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

              Originally posted by Strummer View Post
              I remember when Conan took over Late Night. He was an odd choice because he came from a writing background and didn't have much standup experience. Most people didn't even know who he was. I thought he was awkward and had no future. But over time he really settled in to the role. And his show became groundbreaking. A masturbating bear? Comic gold.

              I doubt that anyone will ever match Johnny Carson's legacy. He was great at what he did. He related to the audience better than anyone else has been able to.

              Young Letterman was ground breaking. His show was edgy and unique. And the bits were great. But he's older now and shooting for a different audience. He's on the downside of his popularity and no longer doing anything new.

              Leno is vanilla and appeals to the masses. Of course that brings in good ratings but he's never really contributed to the genre. That makes for a successful show but I don't watch shows just because they have good ratings.

              I find Craig Ferguson really entertaining. He relates to his guests better than any of the others. It's fun seeing him talk to a star about whatever without the star just doing material. It's not over produced and scripted like the other shows. But I think he has a narrower set of guests to select from because a lot of stars just go on those shows to promote. They're not comfortable with Craig's "let's chat and be silly" format.

              I tried Fallon a time or two but wasn't impressed. His interviews seemed very formulaic. It was greet, show the clip, where you gonna be next, thanks for coming. But maybe he's improved upon that now. I'll give him another look when he takes over for Jay. I definitely liked him on SNL.

              I want to make clear that I'm not anti-Conan. I thought he was hilarious on Late Night, but his Tonight Show simply wasn't that great.

              I used to think that Letterman was hilarious and watched him over Leno for a long time, but in recent years Letterman's show really went downhill. I think that Leno delivers a superior product nowadays.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                Originally posted by Strummer View Post
                Nope, two bedroom townhouse. You misunderstand the point of the lead ins and promos. It's not to let people know who is hosting the show. It's to let people know who the guests are. As successful as Leno's Tonight Show is, they still promote it very heavily. That's because they believe promos will get people to tune in and watch it.
                The point of lead ins is because they don't think people will turn the channel. They figure if they can ideally get you watching at 8PM you'll stay on that channel until something causes you to want to change it.
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                  NBC didn't do Conan many favors when they gave him the Tonight Show. They tried to change him and his show, rather than letting the magic that is Conan continue. It was a struggle. And then they made the Jay Leno show. NBC never gave him a fair shot. They controlled too much for it to ever succeed.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    The point of lead ins is because they don't think people will turn the channel. They figure if they can ideally get you watching at 8PM you'll stay on that channel until something causes you to want to change it.
                    That's part of it. But during the lead in they run promos so you'll want to watch whatever is coming next. Like they might tease you with a news spot about a restaurant getting a low health score rating. You'll think, "I have to watch the news to see which restaurant to avoid." Or they'll promote a talk show by showing that a big star is gonna be on. Like Robin Williams. People will think, "Ok, I'll stay up and see Robin, he's always funny". Without a strong lead-in there are less people to reach with the promo's. It all works together.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                      Originally posted by Strummer View Post
                      I find Craig Ferguson really entertaining. He relates to his guests better than any of the others. It's fun seeing him talk to a star about whatever without the star just doing material. It's not over produced and scripted like the other shows. But I think he has a narrower set of guests to select from because a lot of stars just go on those shows to promote. They're not comfortable with Craig's "let's chat and be silly" format.
                      Yeah, Craig is the only one I watch with any consistency. Your review is spot on. It seems like every new late night host comes in wanting to make their show the one that doesn't adhere to the late night format. But since they all grew up on either Carson or Letterman, they all end up doing fairly similar things, albeit with their own specific studio team. Craig actually can mess with the format and parody the "late night douche" because he doesn't feel beholden to a previously established (and most anachronistic) idea of what a host should be. Unfortunately, other than a small, loyal internet following, it seems that most of Craig's fans not from the younger generations.
                      You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                        When Ferguson talks about his days of doing coke I can't get my head around the idea of a more hyper Craig Ferguson. He's quick-witted and a mile-a-minute as it is. Can you imagine him on coke? LOL!
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                            So I'm catching up on this... Leno apparently might've been fine staying on but his contract was expiring and NBC was anxious to get Fallon into the seat. The difference this time being (Leno says) NBC consulted him on the transition. I'm not exactly sure what he means by that though and how it's different than the first time. And they paid him to shorten his contract to move the transition up. So it's still a little odd. In fact I think it's more understandable how the first time everyone was trying to look 5 years into the future and it seemed like such a long time off until the years just flew by and Jay kind of liked where he was at the end of the 5 years and the show was still on top.

                            So what has changed now?

                            Letterman's point in the posted video about not sticking around is a good one though.

                            Funny thing is, NBC botched the Carson retirement and transition as well. They started planning (read: pushing) for Carson's retirement before Carson had decided to retire. Letterman now says NBC had 2 meetings with him about taking over for Carson. They wanted to make sure he was interested in hosting the Tonight Show before moving forward and at the 2nd meeting he asked them if Johnny was onboard with this and he told them they didn't need to be talking until Carson gave his blessing. And Letterman says that was the last he heard from them or about it until Leno was announced as the new host.

                            Then fast forward until they start pushing Jay out the door the first time. Then pushing Conan out the door. And now pushing Leno out the door again.

                            Wow...
                            Last edited by Bball; 01-26-2014, 07:23 PM.
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                              Originally posted by Bball View Post
                              So I'm catching up on this... Leno apparently might've been fine staying on but his contract was expiring and NBC was anxious to get Fallon into the seat. The difference this time being (Leno says) NBC consulted him on the transition. I'm not exactly sure what he means by that though and how it's different than the first time. And they paid him to shorten his contract to move the transition up. So it's still a little odd. In fact I think it's more understandable how the first time everyone was trying to look 5 years into the future and it seemed like such a long time off until the years just flew by and Jay kind of liked where he was at the end of the 5 years and the show was still on top.

                              So what has changed now?

                              Letterman's point in the posted video about not sticking around is a good one though.

                              Funny thing is, NBC botched the Carson retirement and transition as well. They started planning (read: pushing) for Carson's retirement before Carson had decided to retire. Letterman now says NBC had 2 meetings with him about taking over for Carson. They wanted to make sure he was interested in hosting the Tonight Show before moving forward and at the 2nd meeting he asked them if Johnny was onboard with this and he told them they didn't need to be talking until Carson gave his blessing. And Letterman says that was the last he heard from them or about it until Leno was announced as the new host.

                              Then fast forward until they start pushing Jay out the door the first time. Then pushing Conan out the door. And now pushing Leno out the door again.

                              Wow...
                              I remember the story about Leno hiding in a closet to spy on the NBC execs when they were trying to figure out who would take over after Johnny Carson retired.

                              Carson supported Letterman as his successor but he didn't get his way. After his retirement he used to write jokes and send them to Letterman to use. Letterman didn't tell anyone that Johnny was doing that until after Johnny's death. Ah here's the video of it, all the jokes are from Johnny. This is from a Johnny Carson tribute show Letterman did. This is part one.

                              Last edited by Strummer; 01-26-2014, 09:29 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X