The Return of Jezebel James

Ugh. I had to mention this, because a Jezebel James fan actually was misled by this blurb on TV Guide. The blurb is not technically misleading or incorrect, but if you read it you may get the wrong idea. But I’ve researched the news from an independent source. Here’s the truth of the the situation…

The fan who emailed said that Canterbury’s Law was moving to Friday nights, in place of The Return of Jezebel James. This is not true. Jezebel James continues to run Friday nights at 8:30.

The TV Guide blurb only says Canterbury’s Law is moving to Friday. It is not moving into Jezebel James’s timeslot. There is a solid reason Fox made no announcement officially canceling Jezebel James, because there is no Jezebel James news. Everything is as it was before.

In fact, the TV Listings on TVGuide.com itself for March 28 still show Jezebel James at 8:30, after reruns of Til Death. Canterbury’s Law is on a 9 PM.

The schedule is good for Jezebel James, by the way, because people who tune in for Til Death will be likely to continue watching Jezebel James for the remaining half-hour. Watch these ratings over the next weeks, whether viewers of Til Death spill over to Jezebel James, because that’s one of the numbers that Fox will be watching.

The actual TV Guide schedule is consistent with a news blurb at TheFutonCritic.com (and the TV schedules there). The Futon Critic blurb actually states the facts, all the facts, and avoids the dramatic effect of speculating on what the move “means for Fox’s The Return of Jezebel James.” Because it means nothing for Jezebel James. Reruns of House were airing Friday at 9 PM. They will now air Monday nights instead of Canterbury’s Law. In other words, Canterbury’s Law switched places with House repeats. They’re both hour-long dramas. That makes sense.

The TV Guide piece is what you should expect from a TV critic, not a reporter. Its whole purpose is to state an opinion and to get mileage out of it, not to report news. If TV Guide had simply said Canterbury’s Law was switching places with House, we could have avoided all this confusion. But then they couldn’t have used the blurb to cast doubt on Jezebel James, which is way more sexy. The headline, “… Jezebel’s Out?” borders on being a lie, and is only not one because it contains a question mark. They didn’t technically say anything untrue, and if the blurb did mislead, they can always blame the reader. I’ve seen stuff like this before. Critics do it all the time. Anymore, I treat them like gossip rags, and always double-check their statements (and questions) with independent sources.

-TimK

P.S. If I come across as hating critics, it’s because I do. As a writer, I’ve been burnt by them myself. And when it comes to reviews of my own stuff, I never learn. Critics suck. That’s why many writers ignore them completely.