Blogger Beat Down: AOL TV says LONE STAR’s demise a “symptom of everything that has gone wrong at the broadcast networks”

The subject of this week’s ‘Blogger Beat Down’ is… AOLTV’s Mo Ryan, who in a post earlier in the week asserted that FOX’s swift cancellation of LONE STAR is a “symptom of everything that has gone wrong at the broadcast networks.”

Our Take: As much as it pains us to say this to the usually spot-on Mo Ryan fresh off her recent inclusion to the Peabody Awards Board (Seriously folks, if you’re not familiar with her work, she’s kind of a big deal), blaming the “broadcast networks” for the cancellation of LONE STAR is the TV critic equivalent of spinning-off LAW & ORDER yet again (Read: the easy way out!) If anything, FOX’s attempt to think differently by offering up a procedural-free hour-long drama starring a morally dubious protagonist should be applauded. It was a risky gamble that failed to pay off, big time.


As far as who to blame, the cancelation of LONE STAR says a lot less about everything that is wrong at the broadcast networks — which while far from perfect continue to produce a handful of surprisingly stellar shows such as GLEE, COMMUNITY, MODERN FAMILY, THE GOOD WIFE among others — and a lot more about everything that is wrong with the viewing public. How else to explain last night’s ratings results that saw more Americans tune into $#*! MY DAD SAYS and OUTSOURCED over the likes of 30 ROCK and FRINGE. We’re just sayin’

For all the latest TV news and reviews

  • Shilo

    There’s no room for moral ambiguity on broadcast, sadly. Either the show has to be an easily digestible procedural that takes the bad guy down in 42 minutes, never ending mindless song and dance numbers, or a gushy diatribe on family “togetherness”.

    I’d rather watch stuff like Lone Star, Dexter, Weeds, etc., i.e. stuff that actually challenges you and makes you think.

  • Fake

    While I agree that FOX isn't to blame for Lone Star's cancelation, i wouldn't place the blame on the viewer. Based on the critical response I gave the first episode a try but found myself turned off by this con man who when he wasn't stealing money from good folks, he was cheating on two women.

  • TVFan

    While I agree that FOX isn't to blame for Lone Star's cancelation, i wouldn't place the blame on the viewer. Based on the critical response I gave the first episode a try but found myself turned off by this con man who when he wasn't stealing money from good folks, he was cheating on two women.

  • DB

    it is sad that awful shows or conventional shows that do the same thing over and over are getting big ratings while high concept shows that take risks are getting no eyeballs.

    But, Lone Star was a hard sell from the beginning. Even though I was intrigue by where it was going; I wasn't rooting for the charming con man either. To be honest, some of his actions seem a bit sociopathic. I wanted the older brother to find out his con more than I wanted him to succeed. I was most interested in his relationship with his father and father-in-law. either way, it's sad that it got such horrendous ratings.

    I think Fox would have a better sell had they not focus so much on his two romantic lives, nobody want to see a man fooling two women as marks in his cons.

    As a whole, American do love stupid shitty TV. Let me put it this way, I told my friends my Thursday night appointment TV is Fringe, and got a blank stare with a reply “what's that? we're watching Jersey Shore.” I wanted to choke them right then and there.

  • I understand your paint, as I once tweeted out, family dinners all too often devolve into conversations about how awesome JERSEY SHORE is!

  • There ARE some of us who like goof TV, ie Fringe, AND junk TV, ie Jersey Shore. We all have our dirty little secrets. LOL!

  • HollyM

    The problem isn't the networks or the viewers. It is the concept of this show. You want me to root for a criminal who also happens to be a bigamist? Really!?!

    The acting was great, but the main character had no redeeming qualities. They almost had me until the end of the pilot, when he decided to marry the second woman. That was it for me.

    BTW, we watch Fringe together as a family because that is quality television. We all love it!

  • Interesting point. But here's a question if I may play devil's advocate. How important are redeeming qualities in a TV show's protagonist. What are Dr. House's or Sue Sylvester's redeeming qualities?

  • Nick

    Agree, TVA…people begin spouting nonsense like “redeeming qualities” as a last resort excuse for not watching.

    You're dead on in blaming the dumbed-down American viewers, who would rather watch a wretched reality show of complete nonsense…rather than, say, the best drama and sitcom of all time: Lost and Arrested Development.

  • The only way to not be part of the dumb viewing public is to not watch TV.

  • I won't miss Lone Star. I didn't like it one bit, but that's beside the point. Problem is that networks are cramming to many shows into same time-slots making a hard choice for viewers to choose. And if you pair up new show against a well established returning show, there is no doubt that new show will loose.

  • Chris-wait

    Dr. House saves lives and Sue Sylvester isn't the protagonist, she's the antagonist. She's doing her job perfectly.

  • Sparkxx Mag

    Lone Star is a huge hit. They need to bring it soon!