About every 10 seconds or so this season, "American Idol" host Ryan Seacrest or one of the judges brags about how this group of contestants is the most talented in the show's history. They speak about the huge number of votes being cast and the huge number of song downloads sold on iTunes. Well, as the Associated Press points out, the American people would beg to differ.

"The 21.8 million people who watched last Tuesday's competition was the show's smallest Tuesday audience in more than five years," the AP said. "The show did better the next night, with 22.9 million, but that was the smallest Wednesday audience in three years, according to Nielsen Media Research."

But Idol fans and shareholders of News Corp. (NYSE: NWS) should not get too down since the show can be saved if producers follow my advice:

Is there any content company not interested in dealing with Apple's (NASDAQ: AAPL) iTunes platform? According to Portfolio.com, media conglomerate Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) would like to see its HBO programming distributed on Apple's best-of-breed digital service. An announcement of a deal could be forthcoming very soon.

While some many question the move since HBO is a premium subscription service and could conceivably lose some of its allure, I think it is smart strategy. Digital distribution isn't going away, and HBO needs to be part of every platform, even iTunes. Plus, imagine the possibilities to really cash in here. What if the finale of The Sopranos had been sold on iTunes before it aired? Little experiments like this would not only be valuable in terms of testing contemporary theories about distribution paradigms in the 21st century, but they might also be profitable.

Perhaps the key element of this story is that it seems as if Time Warner was able to convince Apple that its content is worth more than the typical iTunes price point of $1.99. This is important because price elasticity will ultimately determine the overall value of a content library. Apple would, of course, like to charge the bare minimum to the users of its hardware, but where does that leave an HBO? No, HBO would be smart in starting as high as possible in terms of price and then adjusting after a full analysis.

I look forward to seeing this agreement announced, and if it is, I think HBO will not only make some money with Apple, but it will find that the pay-cable channel's brand equity will be boosted in the bargain. Some iTune users might actually be prompted to subscribe. HBO is known as a home for quality programs -- I loved the old Tales From the Crypt series -- and it may soon be known as an iTunes top seller.

Disclosure: I don't own shares in any company mentioned here; positions can change at any time.

There's a great article over at The New York Times. It's about all the changes happening at the broadcast networks concerning the traditional upfront model -- the practice of presenting to advertisers around the month of May a new portfolio of programming to be commenced in the fall season and the subsequent booking of ad dollars for said programming. That's how the process has worked -- CBS (NYSE: CBS), General Electric's (NYSE: GE) NBC, Disney's (NYSE: DIS) ABC, News Corp.'s (NYSE: NWS) Fox, and Time Warner's (NYSE: TWX) and Viacom's (NYSE: VIA) CW show their wares now so that they can sell commercial inventory well ahead of the season premieres.

Well, according to the article, you can thank -- or blame -- the writer's strike for the dismantling of this quaint mechanism. I chose to thank the strike, because I think change is good in this case. You see, the broadcasters want to move to a 52-week season -- i.e., they want to debut new shows on a year-round basis instead of all at once, thus neutralizing the need for big upfront promotions. Actually, I should point out that there were probably other factors that helped this decision along -- most of them centering around costs and expenses. The expensive pilot-development process just isn't where it's at anymore. In fact, I wrote about this new paradigm back in April when NBC's co-chairman Ben Silverman was embracing it -- he's actually going for a 65-week season!

News Corp.'s (NWS) FOX broadcasts American Idol -- which gets 24 million viewers a show -- but is the judging fair and balanced? The New York Times suggests maybe not so much. That's because a major slip-up by judge Paula Abdul this week revealed that the judges watch rehearsals two hours before the live performances and their comments -- which may influence the public vote on the contestants -- are not spontaneous reactions to the live performances.

This week performers sang two songs but the judges were supposed to withhold their remarks until after the second performance. On Tuesday, Abdul watched one of the contestants, Jason Castro, give one live performance but when asked to offer a comment on it by Ryan Seacrest, she gave her thoughts on two performances -- the second of which she had seen in the rehearsal. When Abdul started talking about that second performance, I thought that she had a few too many before the show.

However, the explanation in the Times makes it clear that she was flustered because Seacrest had initially said that the judges would not comment until the performers had completed both of their songs. However, executive producer Nigel Lythgoe changed things up at the last minute, demanding that Seacrest get the judges to give a quick assessment of the performances after their first song.

I absolutely loved this article from The Hollywood Reporter -- it's about Discovery Channel's popular reality program Deadliest Catch. You know the show -- it's the one that tries to make deep-sea crab-catching look fun and cool and exciting (for me, it would be none of the above). It is an engaging show, though -- I've watched a couple episodes, and I will admit, it was hard to turn away from the events on those fishing boats. The people who make these reality shows have genuine talent when it comes to turning ordinary jobs that otherwise would be boring and monotonous if they were experienced in actual life into magical fantasy worlds that become career goals for the viewer taking them in on the small screen. But, the thrust of the Reporter article is that not everything you see on Catch is necessarily representative of actual events all the time.

Apparently, the producers of the show did some editing on the premiere that spliced together two separate events to make them seem like they were happening at the same moment in time. I won't go into the whole thing, but there was a flooding situation on a boat that occurred during one month, and there were giant waves causing chaos on the sea during an entirely different month. The two sequences were combined, and presto -- you think the waves happening during month B are causing the flooding that took place during month A. An outline is offered up as proof of the creative editing, as the document seems to direct editors to make the combination.

The Reporter article states that this might be considered controversial since Catch is supposed to be a documentary and not a reality show. Well, as I've said, I've seen Catch, and personally, I can tell you it isn't a documentary. Nope; not a chance. This is a reality show, and as such, the viewer will always want to assume that not everything is as it seems.

Broadcasting and Cable reports that Katie Couric, the anchor of CBS Corp.'s (NYSE: CBS) Evening News, may leave well before her $15 million a year contract expires in 2011. It suggests Couric could leave as early as next year, following the presidential inauguration in January.

Why would she leave? It looks like low ratings are forcing her out. Despite the media blitz surrounding her 2006 move from NBC's Today show, Couric did little to help the ratings, as CBS Evening News has struggled to find ratings ground behind NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams and ABC World News with Charles Gibson.

While I rarely watch her show, the few times I have she seems to be drained of life -- it is as if she is being forced to play a role that she finds excruciatingly difficult to perform. I think there is a place for her on TV but that is not it. I will be interested to see who comes in after her.

Update: The Wall Street Journal [subscription required] reports that Couric might replace Larry King when his contract expires in 2009. It notes: "One possible new job for the Ms. Couric: succeeding Larry King at Time Warner Inc.'s (NYSE: TWX) CNN [which shares a parent with BloggingStocks]. Mr. King, who is 74 years old, has a contract with the network into 2009. CNN President Jon Klein, a CBS veteran with close ties to some at the network, has expressed admiration for Ms. Couric's work, and the two are friends."

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He has no financial interest in the securities mentioned.

The Heidi Klum-hosted Project Runway has been one of the top shows on cable in recent years, providing General Electric (NYSE: GE)'s NBC Universal's Bravo network with a big hit. The show features up and coming designers competing for cash and an opportunity to launch their own line with a major fashion house.

Now the show's producer, Weinstein Co., wants to elope with Lifetime Networks. NBC has filed a lawsuit against Weinstein, alleging that the producer violated Bravo's right to buy future seasons of the show. For its part, Weinstein argues that it never granted Bravo a right of first refusal, which would have required it to get Bravo's permission before going a courtin' for a new network.

If Bravo lets this show slip away, it will be a huge mistake. Given Bravo's strong brand, you have to think that it can attract more viewers with the show than Liftetime -- meaning that it should be able to outbid Lifetime for the rights. It's not like ABC came along and offered the show a network primetime slot.

In the press release announcing the deal with Lifetime, Weinstein said that it wanted to "sincerely thank NBC Universal and Bravo for all their contribution and support." Apparently, this lawsuit is Bravo's way of saying you're welcome.

Is Viacom (NYSE: VIA) green with envy over Disney's (NYSE: DIS) High School Musical? Probably; and who could blame the powers that be over at Viacom for exhibiting such a sin?

The Hollywood Reporter recently discussed plans made by Viacom's Nickelodeon cable channel for a project dubbed Spectacular! Here's all you need to know about it: it's a musical movie that takes place in -- are you ready for this, you'll never guess in a million years -- a high school. Talk about a coincidence; I'm sure this has absolutely nothing to do with the success of High School Musical.

In case you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic. It has everything to do with Disney's Musical franchise -- Disney has made millions upon millions off the concept.

Here's the problem for Viacom: shouldn't the media conglomerate be zagging while Disney zigs? In other words, Viacom may be putting too much faith into the belief that a hard formula has been established -- that formula being kids-cable-channel-movie + high-school-setting + catchy-musical-tunes = profitable-long-term-franchise.

Donald Trump has a new show in the works: naughty girls are sent to a finishing school where they learn the manners they'll need to behave like socialites. Sounds tasteful.

Now The New York Daily News is reporting that Mr. Trump, as he likes to be called, is looking to get Eliot Spitzer's call girl, Ashley Alexandra Dupre, to come on his show. Jo Piazza's Full Disclosure column writes that "A production source confirmed that the group reached out to the singing floozy and former call girl on Thursday, but have yet to hear back from her. But The Donald told us that he would love to get the chance to class her up in front of a national audience."

Where to begin? I'd be willing to bet that Ms. Dupre already has infinitely more class than The Donald. He is the one who needs to be sent to finishing school. Is a man who goes on WWE, calls Rosie O'Donnell "a pig," and has been married 3 times, really in a position to be putting anyone through charm school? This is to say nothing of his heinous coif, personality, and numerous failures in the business world.

I'm sure this show will be a flop with or without Ms. Dupre, but here's my advice to her: If you go on TV with Donald Trump, having sex with Eliot Spitzer for $5 thousand per hour could be seen by some people out there as the classiest thing you've ever done.

I was stunned when I saw an advertisement from an outfit called PirateStockTV.com on CNBC pitching an unknown microcap trading on the Pink Sheets -- this being CNBC, a network that is supposedly the leader in serious business news.

You can watch the ad here. The narrator advises viewers that "Rudy (OTC: RUNU), in the $5.4 billion sports drink industry is a prime buyout, just like The Coca Cola Company (NYSE: KO) bought Vitamin Water."

There's no disclosure in the television ad or in the video, but the "disclaimer" page on the PirateStockTV website contains this disclosure:

World Wrestling Entertainment (NYSE: WWE) is going to be one busy company this weekend. And don't tell me you don't know why. Well, okay, I suppose a few of you may be in the dark -- you see, Wrestlemania 24 is scheduled for this Sunday. It promises to be a big affair. In fact, I caught Triple H, John Cena, Chris Jericho, The Big Show, Floyd "Money" Mayweather, and Vincent Kennedy McMahon on Larry King's CNN program yesterday -- they were in full promotion mode, and even Donald Trump called in to wish the gang well (you may recall that Trump won last year's hair-match battle with McMahon, a feat that left the latter with a bald head). Oh, and Vince even mentioned the stock.

It was an interesting interview, and it highlighted the fact for shareholders that the data from Wrestlemania should help to tell what kind of state the company is in. Will the buy rates be lower or higher than last year? Tough to tell, but I have to say that there doesn't seem to be, for me at least, that one match that's sure to drive even the most casual of wrestling fans to order up the show on their pay-per-view menu. A lot of the fallen fans will probably come back into the fold this weekend, however, to view the Ric Flair contest, in what is being billed as perhaps his last match. Thing of it is, though, Wrestlemania should still do well, even if it isn't necessarily the best roster they've ever had (I say this subjectively, of course) -- remember, Wrestlemania is not just an event, it's a brand, and a lot of people will order it up regardless. And the event is an excellent opportunity to bring more mindshare into the WWE product. THQ (Nasdaq: THQI) and JAKKS Pacific (Nasdaq: JAKK), for instance, will certainly be hyping the heck out of their WWE videogames this weekend with their annual superstar challenge.

CNBC star Maria Bartiromo and I share a birthday, and I love a good scandal, so I follow her religiously. Maria is fun because she's both gorgeous and cute, smart and sexy. And then there's the strange case of Todd Thomson (the Citigroup exec who fell so in love with Maria that he flagrantly violated ethics, and common sense, just to spend time with her). She's also fun because her nickname is "Money Honey," and what's more: she's applied for a trademark for the phrase! Delicious.

Well, she might have to move fast to use the phrase before she loses the IP to a new generation of money honeys (money honeyettes?). News Corp. (NYSE: NWS)'s Fox Business News has a bevy of beauties dishing up the news on the stock market and the economy: Liz Claman, Dagen McDowell, Jenna Lee, Alexis Glick. Ben Stein wants to know, where did they all come from? His analysis, that finance is both boring and inscrutable, and that men would rather get this boring, inscrutable and (largely) completely irrelevant news from beautiful women, is certainly sensible.



But there's an undercurrent in his story that has me troubled, and though I think that he's right in many aspects of his analysis (it's certainly true that more men watch financial news than women), I'm peeved that he never wonders whether the financial world has just been extremely sexist and is only just now starting to let loose. I also find it odd that he doesn't wonder if there were financially savvy women being excluded from business journalism until now. (His "where did they all come from" question makes it seem as if they sprung from the head of Lou Dobbs like Athena.)

Whither Money Honeys? Here's my thought:

Those who think Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) is happy being the world's most dominant search engine haven't been reading their tea leaves on the wall (or some mixed metaphor like that).

Google recently exited the FCC's 700 Mhz spectrum auction without winning anything but gaining much. The tech giant persuaded the FCC to open up the wireless networks and won big without having to spend almost $5 billion on licenses. I never thought Google wanted to build out a wireless network, and chooses instead to deliver ads and applications to other operators.

I was interested to read yesterday about Google's further lean on the FCC to open up soon-to-be-unused broadcast spectrum as the U.S. converts to digital TV. Google wants access to these "white spaces" to begin using them to manage a nationwide WiFi network -- free, unlicensed and able to reach much farther than WiFi can today.

After I defended Jim Cramer's seemingly bullish comments on Bear Stearns (NYSE: BSC) -- and received some hate-mail for it -- I'm now feeling obligated to go back to slamming Mr. Cramer.

Back in July, Cramer said in an interview for TheStreet.com (see YouTube video below) that "if every loan that was subprime in 2006 blew up, we would still not notice it ... It has no relevance whatsoever ... it's been divided and split among so many different entities that no one guy is actually being hurt other than the dumb guy who ran Bear Stearns."

Well James Cayne got hurt -- and so did every other shareholder in the company. Cramer also said, in a stunning display of condescension that financial journalists are trying to "look like they in the room with the big boys. It's a fascination with trying to prove that you know as much as the hedge funds."

It looks like the omniscient hedge fund masters of the universe got it wrong -- and journalists like Herb Greenberg got it right.

Of the executive bad boys who gained infamy during the early 2000s -- executives at Enron and Worldcom being the most prominent -- Tyco's (NYSE: TYC) Dennis Kozlowski is perhaps the most complex story. For one, the company is still public, sporting a $20 billion market cap, plus another $15 billion for its spin-off, Tyco Electronics (NYSE: TEL).

This made Kozlowski an interesting choice for a profile on American Greed, which had thus far profiled now-defunct entities exclusively.

Kozlowski comes across as a greedy scoundrel -- fraudulently evading over $1 million in taxes on his art collection, using corporate assets to buy personal items, in spite of his frequent 9-figure paydays, and just generally acting like a pretty typical late 90's imperial CEO. Corporate governance at the company was a total joke, with one director reaping an 8-figure payday for arranging one meeting that led to a deal.

In the end, Kozlowski ended up in prison for 22 counts of grand larceny and defrauding shareholders out of more than $400 million. He has maintained that there was no criminal intent, and that the bonuses were authorized by the company's board of directors.

Still -- Tyco was never exposed as an accounting fraud on the same scale that companies like Enron and Worldcom were and, while Deal-a-Day Dennis was too aggressive in his pursuit of acquisitions, a lot of other companies were too, and the stock has appreciated more than 5-fold since he became CEO in 2002.

All that aside, the Kozlowski story definitely fits in the category of "American Greed", even if the Tyco debacle falls short as a "scam." This is definitely the best look at it I've seen so far; be sure to check your local listing for the replays.

To learn more about Kozlowski, take a look at the terrific website CNBC has set up.