What's all the fuss about?

Sometimes in TV land, critics and viewers get what we deserve.

By ERIC DEGGANS, Times TV Critic

© St. Petersburg Times
published February 12, 2002

I don't get it.

Of course, TV takes such absurdist and craven turns these days -- Playboy Playmates on Fear Factor, Victoria Secret's Fashion Show on ABC prime time -- that comprehending it all might be a sign of serious mental instability.

But there are some goings on in TV land that are even more mystifying than usual:

Puzzle No. 1: The fuss over Greta's eyes

Yes, newly hired Fox News face Greta Van Susteren got some plastic surgery. Yes, it's taken the bags out from under her eyes and made her look a few years younger. But has it really made her look like a whole new person?

Days before Van Susteren took her place in Fox News' firmament of stars, the nation's media machine was buzzing about her plastic surgery, which Greta said was done during the month CNN parked her offscreen following her decision to jump to Fox.

The Washington Post said she had a "witness protection eye job"; NBC's Today show, ABC's The View and Live With Regis and Kelly all did stories, and yes, even the wire-service picture in the St. Petersburg Times made her look like Joan Rivers in a funhouse mirror. (For the record, Van Susteren attributed the look to postoperative swelling.)

Then I actually saw her show, On the Record, and the difference didn't look like much at all. She'd had an eye tuck or two, put on more makeup than we're used to seeing and styled her hair some. What's all the fuss?

Once past the eye nonsense, Van Susteren's show is a surprisingly traditional mix of interviews and correspondent reports, similar to what you might see on other channels, grounded in her trademark blunt style.

I know, Van Susteren's makeover is supposed to be a metaphor for her move from CNN to Fox News -- the no-nonsense legal expert leaving the channel where news was the star for a new, Fox-y home.

A coy Van Susteren played along, delaying her comments on the issue until her debut show's end and telling commentator Bill O'Reilly earlier that day she expected the buzz to "grow viewers" for her new enterprise.

More than anything, the episode illustrated two things: Fox News has an uncanny ability to hype its anchors, even before they've actually started broadcasting (according to the Washington Post, Van Susteren's Feb. 4 debut drew 1.6-million viewers, then the audience dropped by 500,000 the next day).

And TV writers who bemoan the focus on looks and "personality" that has infected the cable TV news game -- especially for female reporters and anchors -- better take a long look in the mirror when ticking off the reasons.

Puzzle No. 2: The fuss over Al-Jazeera's tape

I first learned about this via an urgent e-mail sent from a CNN publicist, complete with a transcript of anchor Wolf Blitzer's Jan. 31 report on a mysterious Osama bin Laden interview Al-Jazeera refused to release.

By the middle of the next day, CNN was trumpeting the story regularly, analyzing an October interview in which the terrorist leader ridiculed America's contention that there were hidden messages in his previous addresses and maintained that Islamic law justified the killing of innocents in a struggle against "infidels."

The Arab-centered news network's explanations for not releasing the videotape were unconvincing. First it said the tape didn't exist, then it said the tape had no news value, then it said that the interview was controlled by bin Laden. No doubt, there's more to the story.

But near as I could tell, the tape itself really did have no news value. (Bin Laden believes America will lead its citizens into hell? He refuses to speak directly on whether he was responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks? Didn't we know all this stuff already?)

In fact, didn't American press critics and some news outlets criticize Al-Jazeera for passing along propaganda statements from bin Laden without challenging or editing them? Now that they've decided not to air a video, CNN airs reports that imply they should be criticized for that?

This is what happens when cable news networks take their competition with each other too seriously. In the rush to prove that it's still the top dog in the international news game, CNN made a videotaped mountain out of Al-Jazeera's molehill.

Puzzle No. 3: The fuss over Once and Again and Roswell

Among the network shows likely headed for cancellationville, ABC's blended family drama Once and Again and UPN's teens-from-space adventure Roswell seem to have the strongest fan bases around. (Another such show, Felicity, just got the hook from the WB.)

And thanks to the magic of cyberspace, the "Save Once and Again" group is trying to whip up support online with Web pages and e-mail to persuade the networks to save the Sela Ward-Billy Campbell vehicle.

Already, the group has published an ad in the Hollywood Reporter begging ABC executives to renew the show after it returns to new episodes at 10 p.m. March 4. Fellow fans can surf to its Web site (www.geocities.com/saveoanda) and see instructions for sending messages to ABC.

Likewise, Roswell lovers can head to www.crashdown.com for info on writing UPN executives to plead their case. A similar effort prompted fans to send thousands of bottles of Tabasco sauce to the WB during the show's first season (its alien characters love the stuff), which prompted the network to keep the show around until early 2001, when UPN picked it up.

But my advice this time around is a bit different.

Save your efforts. The viewers have voted.

ABC has kept Once and Again around since 1999, airing the show on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Fridays in a vain attempt to find viewership (as of Feb. 3, it was ranked 97 among all prime time shows, below ABC's Thieves, which was canceled long ago).

The show is amazing, but viewers clearly have not warmed to its complex vision of two divorced parents who find love together, and they've had three years to find it.

Roswell also debuted in 1999 to middling ratings on the WB, and despite efforts to juice the show's sci-fi quotient and a move to UPN, it ranks at 132 among all shows.

Fact is, anyone who wants to see these series has seen them already, and all the Tabasco sauce and industry ads in the world won't change that. Let's move on; after all, we've got Greta's eyes and bin Laden's video to keep us occupied.

-- Eric Deggans can be reached at (727) 893-8521, e-mail deggans@sptimes.com or see the St. Petersburg Times Web site at http://www.sptimes.com.

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.