We Ask Ausiello: CAVEMAN! Huh?

Well it’s taken two years, but we’ve finally come up with a question to Ask Ausiello. Hey Michael, what were you thinking?

Recently, TVGuide’s Super Scooper Michael Ausiello, along with colleagues Stephen Battaglio and Lisa Chambers made the interesting decision to take part in a thirty minute clip show promoting ABC’s upcoming fall lineup. In the above clip, TVGuide’s Lisa Chambers called CAVEMAN’S leading man, err leading CAVEman Nick, “hysterical!” (Really, what clip was she watching?). Battaglio apparently found them sexually appealing (Hey, who are we to judge). While Ausiello calls the show’s premise absurd, but “promises that fifteen minutes into the show you kind of buy it.”

Does anyone else think this kind of endorsement is a massive conflict of interest? Granted, theTVaddict.com is just a simple blog [shudder], but apparently, we were under the mistaken impression that the first rule of journalism was to remain objective. How on earth are we supposed to take TV Guide [as well as Entertainment Weekly and People Magazine] seriously when their staff is shilling for ABC’s new fall lineup?

Thanks to Watch With Intelligence for pointing out this NYTimes article

For all the latest TV news and reviews

  • http://www.givememyremote.com GMMR

    Excellent point. I thought it was a huge conflict of interest to have EW and TV Guide present ABC’s fall preview show.

  • Pingback: Row, Row, Row Your Blog… » Give Me My Remote

  • Frank

    Im saying whis with the utmost truth.

    Cavemen will be the hit comedy of the new tv season.

    If Two and a Half Men can do it, anyone can.

  • Josh

    You’re exactly right Frank. I think this will actually end up being a hit, at least when looking at ABC’s standards. They’ll probably pair it with According to Jim when that returns.

    I showed my dad the Cavemen pilot and he thought it was pretty good. He also likes Two and a Half Men. So I do think that average Americans will end up liking the show. To be honest with you, I don’t think it’s as bad as Jim or 2.5 Men.

  • http://whatisthegfor.vox.com Tim G.

    I’ll give Cavemen a shot initially because I really like the “star” of the show, Nick Kroll. Most people would know him from Best Week Ever, and he’s really dry and funny. He could make the show watchable. If the first 2 or 3 episodes aren’t good, I’ll drop it like a bad habit.

  • http://www.theidiotsbox.com Joe

    Caveman will be alright if they can come up with the quirky dialogue like the commercials.


  • David

    I’ve never been a big Ausiello fan…I listen to their podcast but I prefer yours! Go TV Addict!

  • Flutie

    I don’t buy it….I don’t.

    Has Ausiello even mentioned the show up to this point?

    I give this show one episode before it’s canceled.

  • http://www.thetvaddict.com theTVaddict

    Flutie, Since you asked.

    Ausiello did mention CAVEMEN in the May 18, 2007 Podcast.

    Dan Manu (who I really miss on the podcast by the way) said: What the heck is up with CAVEMEN?
    Ausiello: I don’t know, it’s this year’s Emeril.
    Ausiello: If that’s the best they have in their development, they have really sh*tty development.
    Ausiello: I didn’t really get the show at all…. I won’t be watching…

  • debsagrrl

    Speaking of conflict… being flown to Vancouver, all expenses paid and blogging favorably
    about Sci-Fi channel shows…. Hmmmmmm??? ie. Flash

  • http://www.thetvaddict.com theTVaddict


    Interesting point, But for the record. Vancouver was not an all expense paid trip. In fact, I had to pay for everything myself — including hotel and flight. In addition, I lost one really expensive camera!

  • http://whatisthegfor.vox.com Tim G.

    oooh, pwn3d.

  • http://www.myspace.com/zmanoc Jason in the OC

    Pretty embarrassing for TV Guide and EW. I’m personally disappointed.

  • ewanspotter

    Well, if I may jump in here and defend journalism…

    Yes, one of the first rules is to be objective (obviously depending on the topic), but you can’t seriously consider a report of this nature to be ‘serious’ or ‘regular’ journalism. The same rules don’t apply.

    Don’t get me wrong. I think entertainment journalism is a serious, worthwhile business (well, the ‘Entertainment Weekly’ variety, not the ‘Look at Paris’ crotch!’ tab rags) and it’s the career I’d someday like to have. But these people are critics, bloggers and gossip columnists. They’re not supposed to be objective. In fact, what would be the point of them being objective? Nothing. Their job is to offer cheery commentary on upcoming news, pick favorites, and tell the public what they believe to be the best of the best.

    Now if, say, Jeff Jensen wrote a story promoting Cavemen in ‘EW’ that would be an ethical problem on the part of the magazine. But this just isn’t the same thing.