WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.480 Imagine taking a 140 -character tweet about a 00:00:04.480 --> 00:00:06.960 cranky 72 -year -old man and trying to stretch 00:00:06.960 --> 00:00:10.720 it into a full 21 -minute CBS sitcom. Staring 00:00:10.720 --> 00:00:13.460 William Shatner, no less. Right. Welcome to the 00:00:13.460 --> 00:00:15.839 Deep Dive, because today we are bringing you 00:00:15.839 --> 00:00:18.059 a really fascinating case study for you to just 00:00:18.059 --> 00:00:19.920 sort of wrap your head around. Yeah, we're looking 00:00:19.920 --> 00:00:23.339 at this massive collision between the rawest, 00:00:23.480 --> 00:00:25.980 most unfiltered corners of the internet and the 00:00:25.980 --> 00:00:28.620 highly sanitized, brightly lit living rooms of 00:00:28.620 --> 00:00:32.240 America. It is such a weird friction point and 00:00:32.240 --> 00:00:34.439 our source material for this deep dive is actually 00:00:34.439 --> 00:00:37.960 the Wikipedia page for a very specific notoriously 00:00:37.960 --> 00:00:41.960 bizarre 2010 CBS sitcom. A show that basically 00:00:41.960 --> 00:00:44.640 tried to bridge that massive gap between old 00:00:44.640 --> 00:00:47.219 media and new media. Exactly. We are talking 00:00:47.219 --> 00:00:48.640 about the show titled, and I have to pronounce 00:00:48.640 --> 00:00:50.340 this very carefully, as it officially did for 00:00:50.340 --> 00:00:53.060 broadcast, the show was called Bleep My Dad Says. 00:00:53.200 --> 00:00:56.280 Though it was written out as dollar sign, hashtag, 00:00:56.460 --> 00:00:58.579 asterisk, exclamation point. Yeah, dollar sign, 00:00:58.640 --> 00:01:00.579 hashtag, asterisk, exclamation point, my dad 00:01:00.579 --> 00:01:02.979 says. Which is a title that perfectly encapsulates 00:01:02.979 --> 00:01:04.980 the awkwardness of this entire corporate experiment. 00:01:05.219 --> 00:01:07.500 Oh, absolutely. OK, let's unpack this. Because 00:01:07.500 --> 00:01:11.180 to really get why this show is such a wild time 00:01:11.180 --> 00:01:13.980 capsule, we kind of have to put ourselves back 00:01:13.980 --> 00:01:16.900 in the mindset of the television industry in 00:01:16.900 --> 00:01:19.659 2010. Let's set the stage for you. So the year 00:01:19.659 --> 00:01:22.799 is 2010 and the television landscape is undergoing 00:01:22.799 --> 00:01:25.959 this massive, terrifying shift. Terrifying for 00:01:25.959 --> 00:01:29.000 the executives anyway. Oh, completely. Broadcast 00:01:29.000 --> 00:01:31.780 networks are looking at their aging audiences 00:01:31.780 --> 00:01:33.980 and then they're looking at these staggering 00:01:34.299 --> 00:01:37.280 completely alien internet numbers. Right, because 00:01:37.280 --> 00:01:39.379 social media is suddenly driving the cultural 00:01:39.379 --> 00:01:42.459 conversation. Yes. And traditional executives 00:01:42.459 --> 00:01:45.159 are absolutely scrambling. I mean, ad revenue 00:01:45.159 --> 00:01:47.980 models are starting to look shaky because younger 00:01:47.980 --> 00:01:50.299 demographics are just migrating to platforms 00:01:50.299 --> 00:01:52.299 like YouTube and Twitter. They weren't watching 00:01:52.299 --> 00:01:54.400 multi -camera sitcoms on Thursday nights anymore. 00:01:54.560 --> 00:01:56.900 Exactly. So the networks are desperate. They 00:01:56.900 --> 00:01:58.819 want to capture that lightning in a bottle, grab 00:01:58.819 --> 00:02:01.239 that younger demographic. But they fundamentally 00:02:01.239 --> 00:02:03.980 do not understand the mechanics of those platforms. 00:02:04.299 --> 00:02:06.280 Well, I'd argue they didn't just misunderstand 00:02:06.280 --> 00:02:08.680 the platforms. They misunderstood the appeal 00:02:08.680 --> 00:02:11.340 of the content itself. That is a great point. 00:02:11.599 --> 00:02:14.500 Which brings us to the source material CBS actually 00:02:14.500 --> 00:02:17.539 decided to buy, because this didn't start in 00:02:17.610 --> 00:02:19.590 like a traditional writer's room in Burbank. 00:02:19.789 --> 00:02:22.009 No, not at all. It started on a Twitter feed 00:02:22.009 --> 00:02:24.710 created by a 29 -year -old named Justin Halpern. 00:02:24.849 --> 00:02:27.629 He created an account called, well, Shit My Dad 00:02:27.629 --> 00:02:30.210 Says. Which was basically observational comedy 00:02:30.210 --> 00:02:32.750 in its purest, most distilled form. Yeah, the 00:02:32.750 --> 00:02:35.150 premise was just a collection of unsolicited, 00:02:35.349 --> 00:02:37.870 highly opinionated, and aggressively politically 00:02:37.870 --> 00:02:40.530 incorrect quotes from his 72 -year -old father, 00:02:40.830 --> 00:02:43.469 Sam. You have a cranky older man just speaking 00:02:43.469 --> 00:02:46.629 his mind entirely devoid of context blasted out 00:02:46.629 --> 00:02:49.069 in a hundred But see, this is where I have to 00:02:49.069 --> 00:02:51.229 push back on the very concept of this adaptation. 00:02:51.289 --> 00:02:53.710 How so? Because reading through the source material, 00:02:54.069 --> 00:02:56.129 I'm just struck by the sheer physics of this 00:02:56.129 --> 00:02:59.050 decision. Translating a single Twitter feed into 00:02:59.050 --> 00:03:02.030 a network sitcom is like trying to build an entire 00:03:02.030 --> 00:03:04.789 house out of a few funny bumper stickers. That's 00:03:04.789 --> 00:03:06.889 a really good analogy. Right. Bumper stickers 00:03:06.889 --> 00:03:09.689 don't have load -bearing walls. Where is the 00:03:09.689 --> 00:03:12.969 narrative foundation? How do you stretch a 140 00:03:12.969 --> 00:03:15.789 -character punchline into a 21 -minute story 00:03:15.789 --> 00:03:18.550 arc week after week? Well, that is the fundamental 00:03:18.550 --> 00:03:20.509 structural flaw, isn't it? If you look at the 00:03:20.509 --> 00:03:22.469 plot breakdown in the source, you can actually 00:03:22.469 --> 00:03:25.550 see the network desperately pouring concrete 00:03:25.550 --> 00:03:28.229 to make those bumper stickers hold up a roof. 00:03:28.409 --> 00:03:30.909 They were trying so hard. They really were, because 00:03:30.909 --> 00:03:32.849 they knew they couldn't just have a man sitting 00:03:32.849 --> 00:03:35.449 in a chair shouting tweets for a half hour. They 00:03:35.449 --> 00:03:37.969 had to build a narrative machine to generate 00:03:37.969 --> 00:03:41.250 the quotes organically. Right. they constructed 00:03:41.250 --> 00:03:44.930 this incredibly convoluted meta premise. In the 00:03:44.930 --> 00:03:48.750 show, the main character is Henry, who is a struggling 00:03:48.750 --> 00:03:53.509 writer and blogger. A blogger in 2010. How incredibly 00:03:53.509 --> 00:03:56.210 on the nose. Naturally. And because he can't 00:03:56.210 --> 00:03:58.990 afford rent, he is forced to move back in with 00:03:58.990 --> 00:04:03.090 his thrice divorced 72 year old father, Ed. OK. 00:04:03.550 --> 00:04:06.009 Now, here is where the plot literally mirrors 00:04:06.009 --> 00:04:08.490 the real world creation of the show. Henry is 00:04:08.490 --> 00:04:10.330 trying to get a job as a writer, but he lacks 00:04:10.330 --> 00:04:12.349 good material. Right. He has writer's block or 00:04:12.349 --> 00:04:14.490 something. Yeah. And during a job interview with 00:04:14.490 --> 00:04:17.490 an eccentric editor, his father, Ed, interrupts 00:04:17.490 --> 00:04:20.250 with this completely irrational phone call. And 00:04:20.250 --> 00:04:24.620 that bizarre unhinged rant sparks the of the 00:04:24.620 --> 00:04:26.620 editor conducting the interview. Wait, wait, 00:04:26.639 --> 00:04:29.579 so I'm reading this correctly. The editor basically 00:04:29.579 --> 00:04:32.779 hires him to be a stenographer for his own father. 00:04:32.970 --> 00:04:35.790 That is the exact mechanism. Henry is ultimately 00:04:35.790 --> 00:04:38.449 hired, but the catch is he has to continue living 00:04:38.449 --> 00:04:41.370 with Ed. Wow. He is contractually obligated by 00:04:41.370 --> 00:04:44.149 his new boss to stay in his childhood home just 00:04:44.149 --> 00:04:46.889 to have readily available material from his father's 00:04:46.889 --> 00:04:49.709 unsolicited rants. That is the engine of the 00:04:49.709 --> 00:04:52.290 show. It is a fictional hostage situation. You 00:04:52.290 --> 00:04:54.490 literally have a guy trapped in a house forced 00:04:54.490 --> 00:04:57.449 to mine his dad for content. The irony here is 00:04:57.449 --> 00:05:00.269 profound. I mean, the writers had to create this 00:05:00.269 --> 00:05:02.819 elaborate fictionalized world that justified 00:05:02.819 --> 00:05:05.019 the existence of the very tweets the show is 00:05:05.019 --> 00:05:07.519 based on. Yeah, they build a sitcom premise about 00:05:07.519 --> 00:05:10.779 a guy building a blog about his dad, just so 00:05:10.779 --> 00:05:13.300 CBS could broadcast a sitcom based on a guy's 00:05:13.300 --> 00:05:15.000 Twitter feed about his dad. It's like a Russian 00:05:15.000 --> 00:05:17.879 nesting doll of media formats. It really is. 00:05:18.399 --> 00:05:20.579 But because a premise about a guy sitting in 00:05:20.579 --> 00:05:22.800 a living room tweeting has zero visual stakes, 00:05:23.360 --> 00:05:25.120 the network realized they couldn't just cast, 00:05:25.220 --> 00:05:28.120 like, a standard character actor. No, they needed 00:05:28.120 --> 00:05:31.199 someone bigger. To make a premise centered entirely 00:05:31.199 --> 00:05:33.879 around a cranky dad actually work on screen, 00:05:34.480 --> 00:05:36.699 they needed gravity. They needed someone whose 00:05:36.699 --> 00:05:39.720 sheer presence could carry 21 minutes of television. 00:05:40.339 --> 00:05:42.220 And this is where the project shifted from a 00:05:42.220 --> 00:05:45.160 quirky internet novelty to a massive network 00:05:45.160 --> 00:05:48.939 priority. Yes. The absolute catalyst for this 00:05:48.939 --> 00:05:50.899 show getting off the ground happened in late 00:05:50.899 --> 00:05:56.319 February 2010. They cast William Shatner as Dr. 00:05:56.459 --> 00:06:00.279 Edison Milford. Ed Goodson III. William Shatner. 00:06:00.459 --> 00:06:02.759 Right. The moment Shatner landed the lead role, 00:06:03.240 --> 00:06:05.240 it instantly triggered the green light from CBS 00:06:05.240 --> 00:06:07.879 to produce the pilot. He was the anchor. He was 00:06:07.879 --> 00:06:10.000 the whole show, basically. Surrounding him, you 00:06:10.000 --> 00:06:12.860 had Jonathan Sadowsky playing Henry. And as a 00:06:12.860 --> 00:06:14.899 quick aside from the source, Sadowsky was actually 00:06:14.899 --> 00:06:17.279 a recast. Oh, really? Yeah. The original pilot 00:06:17.279 --> 00:06:19.399 featured an actor named Ryan Devlin in the role, 00:06:19.600 --> 00:06:22.110 but he was replaced by July. Well, that is a 00:06:22.110 --> 00:06:24.689 classic network move when a pilot isn't quite 00:06:24.689 --> 00:06:26.990 clicking during testing. If the chemistry is 00:06:26.990 --> 00:06:28.750 off, you swap out the straight man to better 00:06:28.750 --> 00:06:31.670 serve the star. Makes sense. You also had Will 00:06:31.670 --> 00:06:34.829 Sasso playing Henry's brother, Vince, and Nicole 00:06:34.829 --> 00:06:37.519 Sullivan playing Vince's wife, Bonnie. Both great 00:06:37.519 --> 00:06:40.160 comedic actors. Yeah, and I love this little 00:06:40.160 --> 00:06:42.920 detail in the source. Both Sasso and Sullivan 00:06:42.920 --> 00:06:45.420 had previously been castmates on the sketch comedy 00:06:45.420 --> 00:06:47.959 series, Mad TV. Oh, that's right. So they already 00:06:47.959 --> 00:06:50.740 brought an established comedic rhythm to the 00:06:50.740 --> 00:06:54.060 supporting cast. Oh, and the character of Sam, 00:06:54.579 --> 00:06:56.720 which was the actual name of Justin Halpern's 00:06:56.720 --> 00:06:59.339 real father, was originally a character in the 00:06:59.339 --> 00:07:01.939 pilot. played by Stephanie Lemelin. Wait, the 00:07:01.939 --> 00:07:04.379 dad was originally named Sam in the pilot. No, 00:07:04.379 --> 00:07:06.939 sorry, a separate character named Sam. But her 00:07:06.939 --> 00:07:09.220 character was completely eliminated and never 00:07:09.220 --> 00:07:11.579 appeared in the broadcast pilot or any subsequent 00:07:11.579 --> 00:07:14.779 episodes. Got it. So they streamlined the ensemble 00:07:14.779 --> 00:07:17.360 to focus entirely on the core family dynamic 00:07:17.360 --> 00:07:20.319 orbiting Shatner. Exactly. But let me play devil's 00:07:20.319 --> 00:07:22.639 advocate for a second. Looking at this assembly, 00:07:23.139 --> 00:07:25.389 you have the original creators. David Cohan and 00:07:25.389 --> 00:07:28.310 Max Muchnick, who are legendary, traditional 00:07:28.310 --> 00:07:30.910 multi -camera sitcom veterans. Very traditional. 00:07:31.069 --> 00:07:32.990 You pair them with Justin Halpern, a guy whose 00:07:32.990 --> 00:07:34.810 primary writing credit at the time was a Twitter 00:07:34.810 --> 00:07:38.050 account. Right? And then you drop William Shatner, 00:07:38.290 --> 00:07:41.430 a legendary classic TV star, right into the middle 00:07:41.430 --> 00:07:44.300 of it. So my question is... Was Shatner's casting 00:07:44.300 --> 00:07:47.120 a stroke of genius to anchor the show or was 00:07:47.120 --> 00:07:50.279 it just desperate stunt casting by these TV veterans 00:07:50.279 --> 00:07:53.160 trying to legitimize an Internet novelty for 00:07:53.160 --> 00:07:55.759 an older CBS audience? What's fascinating here 00:07:55.759 --> 00:07:58.579 is that clash of eras. You have three entirely 00:07:58.579 --> 00:08:01.100 different generations and philosophies of media 00:08:01.100 --> 00:08:03.560 trying to operate the same vehicle. Yeah, that's 00:08:03.560 --> 00:08:05.379 a good way to put it. You have the established 00:08:05.379 --> 00:08:08.180 sitcom heavyweights who know the rigid mathematical 00:08:08.180 --> 00:08:11.819 timing of a laugh track. You have the raw new 00:08:11.819 --> 00:08:14.899 media in creator who thrives on spontaneity. 00:08:15.360 --> 00:08:17.720 And you have a traditional television icon known 00:08:17.720 --> 00:08:20.240 for his distinct theatrical delivery. It's quite 00:08:20.240 --> 00:08:22.899 a mix. It created a bizarre melting pot. It was 00:08:22.899 --> 00:08:25.259 less about whether Shatner captured the specific 00:08:25.259 --> 00:08:27.399 nuance of the real -life dad from the Twitter 00:08:27.399 --> 00:08:29.920 feed and more about the fact that Shatner brings 00:08:29.920 --> 00:08:32.840 an undeniable theatrical weight to whatever he 00:08:32.840 --> 00:08:35.080 says. That's true. If you need a man to deliver 00:08:35.080 --> 00:08:37.899 absurd unsolicited rants and make the audience 00:08:37.899 --> 00:08:39.720 believe he means every word without breaking 00:08:39.720 --> 00:08:42.330 character, well Shatner can do that. Okay, so 00:08:42.330 --> 00:08:44.889 they have the star attached. They have the internet 00:08:44.889 --> 00:08:47.070 premise locked and loaded into a traditional 00:08:47.070 --> 00:08:49.830 sitcom format. The million dollar question is, 00:08:50.070 --> 00:08:52.090 what kind of stories did they actually tell? 00:08:52.230 --> 00:08:54.350 That's where it gets messy. How do they try to 00:08:54.350 --> 00:08:57.629 fuse the edgy, unfiltered nature of the internet 00:08:57.629 --> 00:09:00.710 with the cozy, brightly lit format of a network 00:09:00.710 --> 00:09:03.940 sitcom? This is where we see the bumpers of that 00:09:03.940 --> 00:09:06.460 network television format really start to box 00:09:06.460 --> 00:09:08.779 in the wildness of the Internet premise. They 00:09:08.779 --> 00:09:11.039 were trying to serve two completely different 00:09:11.039 --> 00:09:14.139 masters and the seams began to show almost immediately. 00:09:14.460 --> 00:09:16.919 I was looking through the specific episode plots 00:09:16.919 --> 00:09:19.960 in the source and the whiplash is incredible. 00:09:20.259 --> 00:09:21.620 I'm going to read a few of these because they 00:09:21.620 --> 00:09:24.700 perfectly illustrate how they tried and arguably 00:09:24.700 --> 00:09:27.899 failed to mix these two tones. Go for it. Let's 00:09:27.899 --> 00:09:30.389 look at episode two, titled Why Fight? In this 00:09:30.389 --> 00:09:32.710 episode, Ed forbids Henry from getting an internet 00:09:32.710 --> 00:09:35.009 connection for the house. OK, which is a very 00:09:35.009 --> 00:09:38.090 classic, quaint, grumpy old man sitcom trope. 00:09:38.210 --> 00:09:40.909 Exactly. But simultaneously in that same episode, 00:09:41.370 --> 00:09:43.610 Ed, who is a doctor, is being asked to diagnose 00:09:43.610 --> 00:09:45.909 a rash on his daughter -in -law Bonnie's breast. 00:09:46.549 --> 00:09:49.750 Wow. Yeah, so it's this jarring juxtaposition. 00:09:50.269 --> 00:09:54.529 You have a very gentle 1980s -style sitcom misunderstanding 00:09:54.529 --> 00:09:57.529 paired with an attempt at edgy, push -the -envelope 00:09:57.529 --> 00:09:59.730 physical comedy that you might expect from, like 00:09:59.730 --> 00:10:02.429 a premium cable show. Right. Then you have episode 00:10:02.429 --> 00:10:06.669 seven, Dog Ed Pursuit. Ed finds himself deeply 00:10:06.669 --> 00:10:08.730 emotionally attached to a dog named Root Beer. 00:10:09.269 --> 00:10:12.190 Heartwarming, simple, family -friendly. Sure. 00:10:12.409 --> 00:10:15.210 But that storyline is just opposed against Henry 00:10:15.210 --> 00:10:17.909 having very rough sex with Vince and Bonnie's 00:10:17.909 --> 00:10:20.590 supervisor. Again, you can practically hear the 00:10:20.590 --> 00:10:23.210 writer's room arguing over the tone. Seriously. 00:10:23.350 --> 00:10:25.330 Half the room wants a family comedy about a man 00:10:25.330 --> 00:10:27.230 and his dog, and the other half is trying to 00:10:27.230 --> 00:10:29.330 justify the edgy origins of the source material. 00:10:29.490 --> 00:10:31.909 And then my personal favorite, episode 14, corn 00:10:31.909 --> 00:10:34.779 star. Ed decides to run for the Homeowners Association 00:10:34.779 --> 00:10:37.460 president simply because the height of his corn 00:10:37.460 --> 00:10:39.360 stalks becomes an issue with the board. That 00:10:39.360 --> 00:10:42.200 is hilarious. There is absolutely nothing internet 00:10:42.200 --> 00:10:43.980 about that plot line. That could have been an 00:10:43.980 --> 00:10:46.320 episode of the Golden Girls. The execution was 00:10:46.320 --> 00:10:48.480 all over the map because the mechanism itself 00:10:48.480 --> 00:10:50.799 was flawed. I mean, they were trying to manufacture 00:10:50.799 --> 00:10:53.700 viral moments within the rigid structure of a 00:10:53.700 --> 00:10:56.960 22 minute act break sitcom. Based on that tonal 00:10:56.960 --> 00:10:59.799 confusion, I heard the reviews were an absolute 00:10:59.799 --> 00:11:03.059 bloodbath. Oh, they were. Critics just eviscerated 00:11:03.059 --> 00:11:04.919 this thing. They were brutal. We are talking 00:11:04.919 --> 00:11:08.500 about a 28 out of 100 on Metacritic, and on Rotten 00:11:08.500 --> 00:11:11.620 Tomatoes, based on 26 critic reviews, it holds 00:11:11.620 --> 00:11:16.360 a mathematically difficult 0%. 0%. A 0 % requires 00:11:16.360 --> 00:11:19.139 a unanimous consensus of disdain across the board. 00:11:19.360 --> 00:11:21.820 The critical consensus on the site brutally cited, 00:11:21.879 --> 00:11:25.500 quote, childish jokes, abysmal writing, and the 00:11:25.500 --> 00:11:27.620 half -baked stunt casting of William Shatner. 00:11:28.000 --> 00:11:30.139 They didn't hold back at all. Not even a little 00:11:30.139 --> 00:11:31.879 bit. But here's where it gets really interesting. 00:11:32.039 --> 00:11:33.799 I'm throwing a curveball your way. OK, I'm ready. 00:11:34.179 --> 00:11:37.399 If the critics lows this show with every fiber 00:11:37.399 --> 00:11:40.259 of their being, how did the premiere pull in 00:11:40.259 --> 00:11:43.500 12 .58 million viewers? That's a huge number. 00:11:43.620 --> 00:11:47.240 And how on earth did it win favorite new TV comedy 00:11:47.240 --> 00:11:50.120 at the 37th People's Choice Awards in January 00:11:50.120 --> 00:11:53.740 of 2011? It is the ultimate television paradox. 00:11:54.080 --> 00:11:56.039 But, you know, if we break down those numbers, 00:11:56.139 --> 00:11:58.019 it starts to make sense. Well, let's hear it. 00:11:58.320 --> 00:12:01.759 Yes. 12 .58 million viewers tuned in for the 00:12:01.759 --> 00:12:04.840 premiere. That is a massive number. But that 00:12:04.840 --> 00:12:07.480 initial tune in was driven largely by the sheer 00:12:07.480 --> 00:12:10.190 curiosity of the premise. The buzz. Right, you 00:12:10.190 --> 00:12:12.049 have the built -in audience of the Twitter feed 00:12:12.049 --> 00:12:15.529 and the undeniable magnetism of William Shatner. 00:12:16.090 --> 00:12:18.269 People just wanted to see what this weird experiment 00:12:18.269 --> 00:12:20.570 looked like. That makes sense. Now, the source 00:12:20.570 --> 00:12:22.710 notes that over the next two episodes, they lost 00:12:22.710 --> 00:12:26.409 nearly 20 % of that audience. Ah, so they tuned 00:12:26.409 --> 00:12:29.169 in to see the car crash, realized it was just 00:12:29.169 --> 00:12:32.450 a regular traffic jam, and then went home. Precisely. 00:12:32.649 --> 00:12:35.570 The novelty wore off for a chunk of viewers who 00:12:35.570 --> 00:12:37.870 realized it wasn't some revolution in television. 00:12:38.090 --> 00:12:40.429 It was just a sitcom. Just a sitcom. But then, 00:12:40.610 --> 00:12:43.070 the ratings stabilized. The fourth and fifth 00:12:43.070 --> 00:12:45.830 episodes bounced back to over 10 million viewers. 00:12:46.289 --> 00:12:48.669 It basically settled into a consistent groove 00:12:48.669 --> 00:12:51.450 of about 9 to 10 million viewers a week. Which 00:12:51.450 --> 00:12:54.529 is still really solid. It is. And that highlights 00:12:54.529 --> 00:12:58.450 a vast, often ignored disconnect between television 00:12:58.450 --> 00:13:01.809 critics and general audiences. Critics are evaluating 00:13:01.809 --> 00:13:05.090 a show based on structural integrity, the quality 00:13:05.090 --> 00:13:07.570 of the writing, the originality of the premise. 00:13:07.870 --> 00:13:10.149 They are looking for art. Right. But if you were 00:13:10.149 --> 00:13:11.950 sitting at home on a Thursday night in 2010, 00:13:12.450 --> 00:13:14.409 you probably didn't care what a TV critic in 00:13:14.409 --> 00:13:16.850 New York thought. You just wanted to unwind. 00:13:16.970 --> 00:13:20.070 Exactly. A general audience sitting down on a 00:13:20.070 --> 00:13:22.559 Thursday night often just wants the reassurance 00:13:22.559 --> 00:13:25.679 of a multi -camera sitcom rhythm. They want the 00:13:25.679 --> 00:13:27.980 recognizable face of William Shatner delivering 00:13:27.980 --> 00:13:30.519 punchlines on a set that looks like a brightly 00:13:30.519 --> 00:13:32.720 lit living room. The People's Choice Award kind 00:13:32.720 --> 00:13:35.840 of proves that. It does. That award is a testament 00:13:35.840 --> 00:13:37.899 to the fact that for a specific demographic, 00:13:37.960 --> 00:13:39.639 the show delivered exactly what they wanted, 00:13:40.059 --> 00:13:42.639 digestible, familiar entertainment. The comfort 00:13:42.639 --> 00:13:44.860 food of television. Yeah. But even with nine 00:13:44.860 --> 00:13:47.059 to 10 million people reliably showing up for 00:13:47.059 --> 00:13:49.240 dinner every week, it wasn't enough. No, it wasn't. 00:13:49.379 --> 00:13:51.799 Despite the decent viewership. CVS pulled the 00:13:51.799 --> 00:13:55.480 plug. They canceled it on May 15th, 2011, after 00:13:55.480 --> 00:13:58.679 just 18 episodes. It was even replaced mid -season 00:13:58.679 --> 00:14:01.100 by a show called Rules of Engagement, which they 00:14:01.100 --> 00:14:03.500 moved over from Mondays. Which shows that even 00:14:03.500 --> 00:14:05.820 for a network that thrives on familiar comfort, 00:14:06.100 --> 00:14:08.399 the execution here just wasn't sustainable. The 00:14:08.399 --> 00:14:10.399 friction between the premise and the product 00:14:10.399 --> 00:14:13.240 was simply too high. Yeah, but the friction regarding 00:14:13.240 --> 00:14:15.440 the quality of the show? That was happening after 00:14:15.440 --> 00:14:17.620 it aired. We have to talk about the fact that 00:14:17.620 --> 00:14:21.039 an entirely different incredibly vocal group 00:14:21.039 --> 00:14:23.480 was attacking the show before the pilot even 00:14:23.480 --> 00:14:25.460 premiered. Oh yes. And it's entirely because 00:14:25.460 --> 00:14:27.440 of the title. We need to talk about the Parents 00:14:27.440 --> 00:14:30.340 Television Council or the PTC. The culture war 00:14:30.340 --> 00:14:33.850 over a single word. Exactly. As soon as CBS announced 00:14:33.850 --> 00:14:36.950 the show's official name and its 8 .3 p .m. time 00:14:36.950 --> 00:14:40.590 slot at their upfront presentations in May 2010. 00:14:40.830 --> 00:14:43.309 And for anyone listening who is unfamiliar, upfronts 00:14:43.309 --> 00:14:45.549 are those massive glitzy events where networks 00:14:45.549 --> 00:14:47.889 pitch their upcoming fall schedules to advertisers 00:14:47.889 --> 00:14:50.230 to secure commercial funding. Thank you. Yes. 00:14:50.470 --> 00:14:52.830 So at the upfronts, while the PTC went on the 00:14:52.830 --> 00:14:54.730 immediate offensive, they announced a formal 00:14:54.730 --> 00:14:57.629 protest because the title alluded to an obscenity. 00:14:57.789 --> 00:14:59.769 Right. They didn't just write an angry letter. 00:15:00.230 --> 00:15:02.929 They threatened CBS with broadcast license challenges 00:15:02.929 --> 00:15:06.590 for any local affiliate station that dared to 00:15:06.590 --> 00:15:10.490 air the show or its promos before 10 0 0 p .m. 00:15:10.590 --> 00:15:13.690 And that is a very real, very serious threat 00:15:13.690 --> 00:15:16.230 to a broadcast network's infrastructure because 00:15:16.230 --> 00:15:18.929 it targets the local stations. Exactly. If you 00:15:18.929 --> 00:15:20.909 threaten the local affiliates, the individual 00:15:20.909 --> 00:15:22.929 stations across the country that actually beam 00:15:22.929 --> 00:15:25.330 the signal into people's homes. You threaten 00:15:25.330 --> 00:15:27.490 the entire distribution model. The network couldn't 00:15:27.490 --> 00:15:29.450 just ignore it. So the corporate filter kicks 00:15:29.450 --> 00:15:32.210 in immediately. The network scrambles to sanitize 00:15:32.210 --> 00:15:34.490 the property they just bought. They modify the 00:15:34.490 --> 00:15:36.830 title to comply with Federal Communications Commission 00:15:36.830 --> 00:15:39.470 regulations during prime time. Hence the symbols. 00:15:39.750 --> 00:15:41.509 Right. They swap out the letters for symbols, 00:15:41.730 --> 00:15:44.210 the dollar sign, the hashtag, the asterisk, the 00:15:44.210 --> 00:15:46.950 exclamation point. And in the press, they instruct 00:15:46.950 --> 00:15:50.090 everyone to refer to it as bleak, my dad says. 00:15:50.330 --> 00:15:53.210 They also had to systematically tone down and 00:15:53.210 --> 00:15:56.470 modify the actual profanity from Halpern's original 00:15:56.470 --> 00:15:58.769 Twitter feed for the scripts. Which is wild. 00:15:59.649 --> 00:16:02.309 CBS defended the show to reporters, promising 00:16:02.309 --> 00:16:04.730 that the expletive wouldn't be used in promos, 00:16:04.970 --> 00:16:07.769 that the show would in no way be indecent, that 00:16:07.769 --> 00:16:10.330 it would adhere to all CBS standards. And they 00:16:10.330 --> 00:16:11.909 even pointed out that parents who are worried 00:16:11.909 --> 00:16:14.710 could just use the V chip to block it. Right. 00:16:14.929 --> 00:16:17.090 The V chip being that piece of technology built 00:16:17.090 --> 00:16:19.899 into older televisions that allowed parents to 00:16:19.899 --> 00:16:21.799 lock out programming based on its age rating. 00:16:22.100 --> 00:16:24.440 It is really fascinating to watch the corporate 00:16:24.440 --> 00:16:26.960 mechanism try to digest something inherently 00:16:26.960 --> 00:16:29.940 edgy. I mean, they take a property famous specifically 00:16:29.940 --> 00:16:32.659 because of its profanity and raw nature, and 00:16:32.659 --> 00:16:35.100 then immediately assure advertisers and regulators 00:16:35.100 --> 00:16:37.299 that they have removed all the profanity and 00:16:37.299 --> 00:16:39.519 raw nature. That makes no sense. It's completely 00:16:39.519 --> 00:16:41.080 counterintuitive to why they bought it in the 00:16:41.080 --> 00:16:43.980 first place. Yeah. But William Shatner, to his 00:16:43.980 --> 00:16:46.720 credit, was not having any of this PR spin. He 00:16:46.720 --> 00:16:49.080 really wasn't. He gave this incredibly blunt 00:16:49.080 --> 00:16:51.340 defense of the original title. I love this quote 00:16:51.340 --> 00:16:54.080 from the source. He basically said, we say spit, 00:16:54.179 --> 00:16:57.259 why can't we say shit? A fair phonetic argument, 00:16:57.279 --> 00:17:00.240 I suppose. It's a bit simplistic for the FCC. 00:17:00.820 --> 00:17:04.440 He didn't stop there, though. Later, at the Television 00:17:04.440 --> 00:17:08.079 Critics Association press tour in July, he doubled 00:17:08.079 --> 00:17:11.079 down. He told the press, quote, The word shit 00:17:11.079 --> 00:17:13.559 is around us. It isn't a terrible term. It's 00:17:13.559 --> 00:17:16.099 a natural function. Why are we pussyfooting? 00:17:16.359 --> 00:17:18.720 Chander was effectively acting as the voice of 00:17:18.720 --> 00:17:20.880 the internet in that moment, just completely 00:17:20.880 --> 00:17:23.160 unfiltered and refusing to play the corporate 00:17:23.160 --> 00:17:25.960 game. He really was. If we connect this to the 00:17:25.960 --> 00:17:27.940 bigger picture, what this controversy really 00:17:27.940 --> 00:17:30.680 represented was a fundamental clash of media 00:17:30.680 --> 00:17:33.900 ecosystems. Bill Gorman, a writer for TV by the 00:17:33.900 --> 00:17:36.339 numbers, pointed out that the PTC protests was 00:17:36.339 --> 00:17:38.259 ultimately just giving the show massive free 00:17:38.259 --> 00:17:40.319 publicity. Which he correctly predicted would 00:17:40.319 --> 00:17:42.720 boost the premiere ratings. Exactly, and he was 00:17:42.720 --> 00:17:46.180 right. 12 .58 million people tuned in. The controversy 00:17:46.180 --> 00:17:48.400 worked as a marketing tool. It totally did. But 00:17:48.400 --> 00:17:50.559 the core issue wasn't just about a swear word. 00:17:50.759 --> 00:17:54.319 It was about the irreconcilable difference between 00:17:54.319 --> 00:17:57.119 the unfiltered democratic freedom of the internet, 00:17:57.279 --> 00:17:59.279 where a guy can just quote his dad and get millions 00:17:59.279 --> 00:18:01.519 of followers because it feels authentic, and 00:18:01.519 --> 00:18:04.640 the heavily regulated, advertiser friendly, politically 00:18:04.640 --> 00:18:07.140 sensitive world of prime time television. They 00:18:07.140 --> 00:18:10.299 just don't mix. No. Trying to adapt this Twitter 00:18:10.299 --> 00:18:13.220 feed into a CBS sitcom is like trying to play 00:18:13.220 --> 00:18:16.519 a chaotic open world video game using a rigid 00:18:16.519 --> 00:18:20.529 two button joystick from 1985. The hardware of 00:18:20.529 --> 00:18:23.190 network TV simply wasn't built for the software 00:18:23.190 --> 00:18:24.990 of the unfiltered internet. That's a great way 00:18:24.990 --> 00:18:26.829 to look at it. The essence of the Twitter food 00:18:26.829 --> 00:18:29.250 was its transgression. By censoring the title 00:18:29.250 --> 00:18:31.710 and softening the quotes to please the FCC and 00:18:31.710 --> 00:18:35.230 the PTC, CBS basically stripped away the very 00:18:35.230 --> 00:18:37.369 authenticity that made the property valuable 00:18:37.369 --> 00:18:39.950 in the first place. It became a sanitized echo 00:18:39.950 --> 00:18:42.509 of the thing it was trying to be. Which leads 00:18:42.509 --> 00:18:45.289 us to its weird, fleeting legacy. I mean, it 00:18:45.289 --> 00:18:47.589 was a total flash in the pan, but it left this 00:18:47.589 --> 00:18:49.869 incredibly strange pop culture footprint. It 00:18:49.869 --> 00:18:53.450 did. In 2011, Cartoon Network sketch show Maddie 00:18:53.450 --> 00:18:56.450 actually aired a crossover parody promo called 00:18:56.450 --> 00:18:59.710 Meep, my dad says. That is a phenomenal piece 00:18:59.710 --> 00:19:02.470 of trivia. Isn't it? It featured the Looney Tunes 00:19:02.470 --> 00:19:04.670 character, the Road Runner, playing the role 00:19:04.670 --> 00:19:08.250 of the dad, and they used his classic Meep Meeps 00:19:08.250 --> 00:19:11.329 to imitate the sensor bleeps. putting black bars 00:19:11.329 --> 00:19:13.910 over his beak when he spoke. That's amazing. 00:19:14.069 --> 00:19:15.690 When you're getting carotied by the road runner 00:19:15.690 --> 00:19:18.349 over broadcast censorship, you have officially 00:19:18.349 --> 00:19:20.630 entered the weirdest timeline of pop culture. 00:19:20.910 --> 00:19:22.890 It definitely secured its place in the trivia 00:19:22.890 --> 00:19:24.809 books, if nothing else. And as a quick footnote 00:19:24.809 --> 00:19:27.009 from the source, the creator, Justin Haliburn, 00:19:27.049 --> 00:19:29.769 actually did get a second shot at adapting his 00:19:29.769 --> 00:19:32.769 blog based material into a series later on with 00:19:32.769 --> 00:19:36.210 a show called Surviving Jack. But sticking to 00:19:36.210 --> 00:19:38.710 our 2010 time capsule. So what does this all 00:19:38.710 --> 00:19:40.619 mean for you listening right now? Why should 00:19:40.619 --> 00:19:42.779 you care about an 18 -episode sitcom that got 00:19:42.779 --> 00:19:45.700 canceled over a decade ago? Exactly. Well, this 00:19:45.700 --> 00:19:47.799 show is the ultimate case study in what happens 00:19:47.799 --> 00:19:50.079 when corporate media tries to package and sell 00:19:50.079 --> 00:19:52.759 authenticity. The executives saw the numbers 00:19:52.759 --> 00:19:54.819 on Twitter. They saw the raw engagement. And 00:19:54.819 --> 00:19:56.640 they thought they could just buy that authenticity 00:19:56.640 --> 00:19:59.059 and put it on a soundstage. But they couldn't. 00:19:59.140 --> 00:20:03.200 No. No. Because the very act of adapting that 00:20:03.200 --> 00:20:06.720 raw internet feed, censoring the title, adding 00:20:06.720 --> 00:20:09.619 a laugh track, inventing a convoluted backstory 00:20:09.619 --> 00:20:12.480 about a blogger moving home just to capture the 00:20:12.480 --> 00:20:15.299 quotes fundamentally altered its appeal. They 00:20:15.299 --> 00:20:17.240 bought a rebellious spirit and immediately gave 00:20:17.240 --> 00:20:19.799 it a curfew. They wanted the edge without the 00:20:19.799 --> 00:20:21.779 risk. Yes. And that leaves us with something 00:20:21.779 --> 00:20:25.519 to really go on as we consume media today, because 00:20:25.519 --> 00:20:28.200 this isn't just a 2010 problem. No, not at all. 00:20:28.359 --> 00:20:30.480 The platforms have changed. The friction hasn't. 00:20:30.519 --> 00:20:32.660 I think the lingering question here, the one 00:20:32.660 --> 00:20:35.319 that applies to almost every viral TikTok star 00:20:35.319 --> 00:20:37.500 or niche YouTube creator who gets a development 00:20:37.500 --> 00:20:40.980 deal today, is this. When we demand that our 00:20:40.980 --> 00:20:43.519 favorite unfiltered internet creators get these 00:20:43.519 --> 00:20:46.640 massive mainstream opportunities, are we actually 00:20:46.640 --> 00:20:48.880 asking for the very thing that will destroy the 00:20:48.880 --> 00:20:50.559 authenticity we loved about them in the first 00:20:50.559 --> 00:20:52.700 place? Because at the end of the day, no matter 00:20:52.700 --> 00:20:55.180 how much money a network throws at it, you really 00:20:55.180 --> 00:20:57.319 just can't build a sturdy house out of funny 00:20:57.319 --> 00:21:00.930 bumper stickers. The first strong wind? or in 00:21:00.930 --> 00:21:03.549 this case the first wave of television critics, 00:21:04.049 --> 00:21:05.309 is going to blow the whole thing down.