Law & Re-Ordered

Some shakeups are coming to the Law & Order set this fall, and while the net effect is yet another Y chromosome on the cast, the changes being made might help restore at least some of this old warhorse's former glory.

For starters, Jack McCoy (Sam Waterson) will be stepping up to the big chair, as Fred Thompson's presidential ambitions mean the end for his character, District Attorney Arthur Branch. It will be interesting to see McCoy move into the role of sage after 13 seasons as the driven, no-holes-barred, right-hand man; though I do slightly wonder how this promotion will be explained. Through the years, McCoy has made a lot of political enemies; of judges, defense attorney's, etc. for some of his "unorthodox" methods. I would think he would have at least some trouble getting elected DA.

To fill the ADA vacancy, Dick Wolf & co. have chosen British actor Linus Roache, most well known (at least for me) for his role as Thomas Wayne in Batman Begins. His scenes in that film - slight though they were - make me feel good about the producers' choice.

So does the addition of Jeremy Sisto, who has been tapped to replace the underwhelming Milena Govich as Detective Green's partner. Sisto was most recently seen in NBCs short-lived Kidnapped but is probably best known by some for his role on Six Feet Under.

L&O's future was up in the air as recently as a couple months ago, due to sagging ratings. Frankly the show has seemed uneven since Jerry Orbach's departure three seasons ago. While I love much of Dennis Farina's work, he didn't seem to quite fit the style and mood of this particular series, and this was probably part of what led to his early exit after two seasons . Last year's addition of Govich as Det. Nina Cassady was mishandled as well. Her character was written somewhat poorly and her performance was equally uncompelling.

If these new characters are fleshed out a little better than the additions of recent-past, the show might be able to win its appeal and get off death row.

"Law & Order": Moving Violation

Speculation has been rampant in recent weeks that Law & Order (the original) might not get renewed by NBC this fall in light of declining ratings. As an aside: the network moved the show to Fridays at 10pm, not necessarily the hottest TV watching time. That may not matter however, because there are reports out today that TNT may pick up the show if NBC declines to. This makes sense since TNT is already basically branded with the show, airing somewhere around a score of eps a week (not counting the occasional holiday marathon).

Also, I think the cable outlet would be more willing to air new episodes in a more prestigious time slot then that to which NBC has relegated it as of late. In fact, imagine what a 1-2 punch an evening of The Closer followed by a new Law & Order (or vice versa) would pack. My only fear is that TNT might not have the budget to pay for the current cost of episodes (reportedly $4M per), thus the move from network to cable might mean a major cast shakeup; a proposition which may not be all that bad to some fans of the show.

I rely almost exclusively on TNT to watch L&O, so the change suggested suits me just fine. In fact, I would probably be more apt to watch first run episodes if they aired at a better time - maybe Tuesday nights - on TNT. My only request is that the network start incorporating earlier episodes of the series into their rotation of reruns. I've seen the pack of early '00s episodes so many times I'm beginning to speak in an Elisabeth Rohm inspired monotone.

Ripped From the Airwaves

In an interesting development, it turns out that if Law & Order star and former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson does in fact run for president, NBC will have to pull any episodes of the popular procedural in which he appears. Unless they want to provide equal time to his opponents. A prospect, according to "The Washington Post", they are not about to consider.

For a looong time, the FCC has enforced the so-called equal time doctrine to ensure that for any free air time given to a candidate by a broadcaster, an equal amount be given to his or her opponent(s).

Most of the time I believe this usually involves debates, interviews, etc. (I don't think paid political ads count), but there is precedent involving a candidate whose airtime comes in the form of acting (professional as opposed to political):

During the 2003 gubernatorial race in California, television stations dropped all Arnold Schwarzenegger movies out of fear that showing them would require them to give countless hours of free airtime to all 134 other candidates for governor.

Stations also dropped "Bedtime for Bonzo" and other Ronald Reagan movies during his campaigns for governor of California and president.

NBC won't be hurting too much if they have to drop some reruns of L&O, they can always put a Fear Factor reunion in it's place. The article goes on to speculate however, on something far more intriguing:

The FCC rules have never been applied to cable channels, though several legal experts said cable often abides by an equal-time guideline in the hopes of avoiding a legal case that would set a precedent.

Thompson's situation could spark such a case...The TNT cable network shows several hours of "Law & Order" reruns every day and often holds all-day marathons. If that continues while Thompson is running for office, one of his rivals could seek to apply the equal-time rule to cable TV.

The part about setting a precedent is important. If such a situation did arise and the FCC were to step in to resolve the matter, it might give them a legal foothold to start holding cable networks to the same standards as over-the-air broadcasters on a much broader scale. That's slightly scary for a number of reasons I won't get into right now. Let's hope Mr. Thompson reconsiders his decision after he realizes it's easier to fight fictional crime than a real war.