Head on over to www.jackmyers.com to continue reading Ed Martin's Watercooler TV and all of your favorite MediaVillage features.

See you there!

As Goldberg hugged her, Coleman began naming some of the movies Whoopi starred in that she had grown up watching. She then began to explain that her wish to meet Goldberg was prominently displayed on her MySpace page. Holding back the sobs and with tears rolling down her cheeks, Coleman turned to Walters and noted that listing one's wishes on one's MySpace page and then having them come true was a big deal for people of Coleman's generation.

This was one of the most moving moments I have seen on live television in a long time, and definitely the most emotional moment on The View since Nuclear Wednesday last May, when Rosie O'Donnell launched a vicious verbal assault on Elisabeth Hasselbeck and then suffered a meltdown because Hasselbeck refused to put up with O'Donnell's outrageously rude behavior. That was great television, too, but it was also uncomfortable and distressing to watch. The exchange between Goldberg and Coleman, by contrast, was sweet and joyous.

So what does Walters do? As Coleman is explaining the importance of MySpace to young people today -- the first time I can recall hearing such an explanation on The View from a young person (Coleman is in her mid-twenties) -- Barbara the Veteran Journalist interrupts her and insists that they return to a question one of the women had posed when Coleman sat on the couch, a second before she became overwhelmed at being in the presence of a woman who means so much to her.

"Let's get back to the question," Walters said, seizing the spotlight. I don't remember the exact wording of the question, but it was something along the lines of, "Why is High School Musical so popular?"

Jeez, Barbara! Every journalist who has gotten within ten feet of any of the stars of the HSM movies since the first one became a phenomenon in early 2006 has asked a variation of that very question, and we can all recite the same responses, as Coleman did. (It's fun, the music is great, it's family friendly, etc., etc., etc.)

Heaven forbid Walters had held her tongue and let Goldberg, who is still settling in to her new gig, respond to Coleman's outpouring of emotion with comments and questions of her own.

Barbara, Barbara, Barbara. Listen to your subjects and respond to what they are saying -- even if it means skipping over the routine questions you have prepared in advance. The View will be better for it.

"We began screening an early cut of Kid Nation to clients and agencies this week, and the program has been well received. We will continue the screenings next week. We believe that the issues raised about Kid Nation will be resolved when the viewing public sees the first episode on September 19."
Apparently CBS released this statement to a handful of reporters late last week. Interestingly, its content -- and the fact that the press has yet to see even a rough cut of a show that should have been available back in June -- would seem to support the assertion I made in my column that the network is "skillfully fanning the flames of [the] media firestorm" that is raging over this program.

According to the statement, even more advertising executives will have the opportunity to see Kid Nation this week. Since CBS is putting out word that they are responding favorably to the show, I urge any advertisers who have seen it -- or anyone who watches it during the next few days -- to contact me and let me know what you think. With your permission, I will publish your comments on www.jackmyers.com with or without your name attached.

When a movie studio keeps a film away from critics prior to its release, it has generally chosen to do so because studio executives sense that the press will trash it. In other words, they know it's a steaming pile of garbage that can be massively marketed into a mighty multi-million-dollar opening -- as long as nobody with any influence sees it first!

I'm not saying Kid Nation is a steaming pile of anything. It may be a wonderful series. CBS clearly thinks it has a winner here, because over on cbs.com the network is actively recruiting kids to participate in a second season. I do wonder, though, why so many of the on-air promotions for the show have featured children looking so distressed. This would seem only to fuel the fears of folks who already think that kids were somehow abused or traumatized during the filming of the program. I'm not saying that the producers of Kid Nation or CBS executives traumatized children. But I'm troubled by the observation that the network has been using clips of children who appear to be terrifically upset to generate interest in the show while simultaneously telling us all that there is no need to be alarmed.

I understand that not all of the promotion for Kid Nation features distressed kids. In fact, the ads for the series that are running on CBS this week make it seem more a grand adventure than an emotional ordeal. The feel-good approach doesn't stop with television. I made two trips to my local Westfield Shopping Mall during the Labor Day weekend and during both visits I heard several perfectly pleasant commercials for Kid Nation on Westfield's in-house broadcasting service. The audio emphasized the fact that kids are excitingly left on their own without adults to run their lives. It seemed to speak directly to the many tweens and young teens that had been left on their own without adults as they roamed around the mall. Presumably, parents shopping with their young ones were also intrigued.

Imagine . . . CBS actively promoting a new show to kids, tweens, teens and young parents who have children. The 2007-08 season has yet to begin and already it's full of surprises.

Unfortunately, it's not the kind of advance awareness a network hopes for when promoting a freshman series.

I'm speaking, of course, about Kid Nation, the CBS reality show set to premiere on September 19. The network is currently under attack from every direction, pounded with accusations of child abuse, child neglect, child manipulation and general all around deviousness.

Actually, I don't think CBS is reeling from any of this. In fact, I think the network is skillfully fanning the flames of this media firestorm. As you read this, CBS is recruiting children for a second season of Kid Nation on its Web site -- before anyone has even seen the first.

Kid Nation, for the six people out there who may not know, is one of those unreal reality shows in which people are made to do things that never happen in real life. In this case, 40 children between the ages of 8 and 15 were shipped off to a ghost town in New Mexico where they were left for 40 days to set their own rules, create their own government and bring the town back to life while cameras rolled. There were no ongoing eliminations, but at weekly town meetings the kids were free to choose if they wanted to bail and go home. There were adult supervisors of all kinds around at all times, including the producers of the show.

The kids' parents signed off on this with full knowledge, I am told, that they would not be allowed on site. (Among other details, it has been widely reported that in the contract they signed parents agreed that the network would not be held liable if any of their little darlings became pregnant or contracted a sexually transmitted disease while livin' the dream in the great southwest!) CBS has made clear that it did not violate any child labor laws that existed in New Mexico at the time of filming earlier this year (even though the kids were involved in a 24-hour-a-day work effort). New Mexico has since changed its laws.

Right from the start there have been questions about this show. Way back in May some people were disturbed by clips of kids who were obviously mentally and physically exhausted weeping about one thing or another. But lately the questions and complaints have gotten downright ugly. We have heard that some kids accidentally drank bleach and others were spattered with cooking grease, and that they may or may not have received sufficient medical attention, and parents weren't informed of what happened. The wailing is growing louder by the day.

The one complaint I haven't heard anyone make is this: What is the value of a show in which kids learn that they can survive without their parents and other adult relatives, not to mention their teachers? Is this something any parent should encourage his or her child to participate in, or that a network should be encouraging millions of children to watch?

Without having seen the show (and whose fault is that?) my response is, I think not. If this show ends in any way other than with the kids realizing how much they need their parents and teachers it will be a disgrace. I have expressed this concern to dozens of advertisers, journalists and network executives with knowledge of Kid Nation since upfront week, and all but a couple of people have responded by looking at me as if a lizard were crawling out of a hole in my forehead.

Call me crazy, but I think adults play an important role in the lives of children -- especially their parents. That responsibility is not something to screw around with.

Sadly, as we are seeing with the Kid Nation crisis, it seems some kids might be better off without certain adults calling the shots. What kind of parents willingly sign the care and feeding (and, apparently, the sexual health) of their minor children over to a corporation for 40 days with the knowledge that their kids will be "utilized" in a profit-making operation intended to benefit a division of that corporation?

This situation is a mess no matter which way you look at it. For instance, it will be interesting to hear the truth about the bleach and grease incidents and any other hardships that may have befallen these children. Frankly, it doesn't sound like any of them were made to do anything that millions of children in every country have done in past generations -- help run their households, care for their siblings, do chores, learn the value of work and suffer the occasional boo-boo. I'm guessing that if any kids did indeed attempt to drink from a bottle of bleach they likely spat it out before swallowing and immediately rinsed their mouths out with water, and that the grease splattering has been grossly exaggerated. (Any child who has ever watched or helped his or her mother cook a meal has been hit with a stray spat of two and survived to tell the tale.) I'm betting there were many minor cuts, scrapes, bruises and other everyday child injuries that went unreported. If there were, big deal.

But, as far as any mental or emotional trauma that any of the kids may have suffered, the blame for that starts and stops with their parents. Shame on them all.

Earnhardt had died on February 18 of that year during the Daytona 500 when his car crashed into a wall in front of thousands of horrified fans at the track and millions of devastated racing enthusiasts watching on television. He was 49 at the time. It wasn't Earnhardt's first crash, and at first it didn't appear to be his worst. As seen in this film, Earnhardt had crashed in July 1982 at Pocono Raceway, leaving his car so thoroughly demolished that it was considered a miracle when he emerged from the wreckage with only a broken leg. He suffered another seismic crash in July 1996 at Talladega Speedway, in which he hit a wall at 190 mph. He was on his feet immediately following that crash, too.

Dale is filled with extensive archival race footage (including the crash that took Earnhardt's life), never-before-seen home videos and interviews with Earnhardt's family, friends and professional rivals. There are also many now-poignant interviews with Earnhardt himself, including one that was recorded three days before his death in which he talks about how lucky he is and tells his interviewer that he "has it all." His success had not come easily: As Newman notes early in the film, Earnhardt "worked for every fan, every dollar and every win."

That isn't the only emotional moment in this two-hour CMT production. Earnhardt's son, Dale Jr., also a championship racer, talks about moving up through the NASCAR ranks and the pride he felt racing in a car owned by his father. Dale and his son weren't big on talking to each other about their feelings, but at one point Dale Jr. was moved to write down everything he wanted to say to his dad, which filled a page and a half, and then read it to him.

"I read it often," Dale Jr. says during the film. "I like to remind myself what he meant to me."

Ladies, keep a box of tissues handy. The men you watch with might need them, too, because it seems that Earnhardt meant as much to other people as he did to his son. In fact, in another touching sequence during this film, Dale's mother Martha sits quietly on her porch and reflects, "It amazes me how many people love my son."

Dale also recalls Earnhardt's joy at becoming the champion of NASCAR in 1980 at age 29 and his legendary frustration at failing to win the Daytona 500 until 1998, his twentieth year of trying. People inside and outside of the sport were so invested in Earnhardt's two-decade determination that when he finally did win that race every man on every crew at the track stood at the edge of the pit lane to congratulate him. That's a tissue moment of another kind. So is the story of a little girl in a wheelchair who gave Earnhardt a good luck penny before that race and told him he was going to win. Earnhardt glued it to the dashboard of his car. The rest is history.

While chronicling Earnhardt's rise from his modest childhood in the textile town of Kannapolis, North Carolina, to international NASCAR superstardom, Dale also recalls much of the history of this beloved sport, from informal racing on dirt tracks in the '30s and '40s to the multi-billion dollar industry that it is today.

Note: On September 4, country superstars Kix Brooks and Ronnie Dunn will host Dale Pre-Show: His Greatest Comeback at 7 p.m. on CMT, just before the premiere of Dale at 8. Comeback will feature interviews with Dierks Bentley, Billy Ray Cyrus, John Rich, Cowboy Troy, Jack Ingram, Jo Dee Messina and other country music stars in which they will share their memories of and feelings about Earnhardt. Also included is footage of Earnhardt's legendary come-from-behind win at the 2000 NASCAR Winston 500 race at Talladega.

The observational reality series Life of Ryan, which debuted this week as the network's chosen companion to its soaring smash The Hills (new episodes of both shows debut every Monday at 10 and 10:30 p.m., respectively), brings some much needed balance to MTV's increasingly distressing output of shows about egregiously self-obsessed teens and twenty-somethings. If extraterrestrials were to access MTV and conclude that the vapid yappy young people in such shows as My Super Sweet 16, The Real World and The Hills represent all earthlings they likely would not hesitate to vaporize the lot of us, if only to restore order to the cosmos.

Perhaps life was different for Ryan during the last few years, since he became a pro athlete and won X-Games gold at the age of 13, but Life begins shortly after his parents have divorced, and their split is chipping away at what must have been a near-perfect existence for him. The parents of his best friend Casey are also recently divorced, and the two boys worry now about the upcoming awkwardness at holidays and the impact their broken homes will have on their younger brothers. Ryan is clearly determined to care for siblings Shane and Kane, who are both rocked by the changes in their lives. "Now that I'm the man of the house," he says, "spending time with my brothers is more important than ever."

Ryan and his brothers live with his mother, Gretchen, who is also his busy manager, and it's obvious they all love each other. But Ryan loves and admires his dad, too, so much so that he wonders what kind of person he would have become if his dad hadn't "always been there" for him. (Dad is still in the boys' lives, albeit in a reduced capacity.) He also wonders what it will be like for his brothers to come of age without their dad around on a full time basis.

"When I was young and I crashed my dad was always there to catch me," he recalls. "Now, when I have to go out of town, who'll be there for my brothers?" That's a huge concern for Ryan because he travels many months each year to compete, make appearances for his sponsors and do publicity, all of that managed by mom.

Another concern brought on by all the travel is the sorry state of Ryan's romantic life. He's sweet on a girl named Cambria, but she's drawn to another fellow named Mitch, presumably because Ryan is away so much of the time. This is an interesting storyline that will certainly fuel future episodes.

There are times in episode one when it seems that Gretchen is pushing her son to his limits by constantly booking him on trips. "With all the things going on in my life the only place I want to be is home," Ryan laments in narration. Sometimes he pushes back, but always in a polite way. At one point he tells Gretchen he's going to a local dance at the end of the week and doesn't care where he's supposed to be. Later Ryan complains about an upcoming trip to Japan, but he ultimately caves and tells his mother to ignore his concerns and just make the arrangements. He will go, he says, because he always comes through.

As nice as it is to see decent kids like Ryan and his friends receiving the full MTV treatment, I do have a serious concern about Life of Ryan. It is not that much of a stretch to add Ryan to the growing list of series (including Nanny 911, Supernanny and the latest hot button, CBS' Kid Nation) that document difficult times for little kids, in this instance Ryan's brother Kane. Ryan may be old and experienced enough to make major life decisions, but his brothers are younger, and someone, presumably Gretchen, decided to allow cameras to follow them around as they cope with the pain of their parents' divorce. Shane and Kane are minors who are going through one of the most intensely painful experiences a child can have, and they are doing so on camera with the promise of profits for all. Is that responsible parental behavior? Discuss.

That 17.2 million viewers watched HSM2 is mighty impressive, but it seems a rather conservative figure, given the fact that so many kids and 'tweens watched with other children, not to mention teenagers and adults who may or may not want to admit their fondness for the High School franchise. I wonder: Would the audience have been so large had HSM2 debuted on Disney's big broadcast sibling, ABC? The fall season and the start of the school year are fast approaching. What would have happened had ABC kicked off its premiere week with this movie? Equal success? Bigger numbers? Or would it have under-performed, since the millions of children and 'tweens who have embraced HSM (and all things Disney) are largely unfamiliar with the broadcast networks. And while we're on the subject, in the interest of long-term planning should the broadcasters do something about that?

Disney, of course, offered an in-home crash course in all things HSM2 last weekend, culminating in a repeat Sunday (the third consecutive night during which the movie was presented in primetime) that featured lyrics to its songs on screen and interstitial bits about the making of the dance sequences. Three decades ago one needed a week or three to get to a similar level of oneness with Grease.

As successful as HSM2 was on television, I wondered as I watched the other night (with an all-ages group of viewers) what it would be like to watch the gang from East High in a crowded movie theater -- to share the experience with hundreds of others, as I had the fun of seeing Saturday Night Fever, Grease, Flashdance and Footloose. During the movie's four grand production numbers -- (What Time is It, I Don't Dance, Everyday and All for One) -- it was easy to imagine it playing on the big screen to a theater filled with screaming, applauding young people who would later be heard singing the closing song while walking to the parking lot.

The next installment in the HSM franchise will indeed be a theatrical film, so in another year or two we'll all see how it translates to the big screen (and if it remains as profitable in the transition). But for now, I'm damn glad HSM2 turned up on television, especially during this remarkable summer of non-stop cable sensations.
This will forever be remembered as the summer that started with the most talked about finale of the year, HBO's The Sopranos, and ended with the most talked about premiere of the year, HSM2.

On that note, am I the only one who's finding it hard to get excited about the arrival of the broadcast networks' fall season after this summer of unprecedented cable entertainment? Normally, at this time of year I would be counting the days until premiere week. This year, not so much. Similarly, am I the only one currently wondering how the cable networks will collectively top this season's offerings during the summer of 2008? Because if they don't, the headlines comparing next year to this year will be all bad, just as the broadcasters take a beating when their networks move through a fall season that is not as successful as the one that came before.

CBS Corp. president and CEO Leslie Moonves isn't worried about the state of broadcast television. Not audience erosion, nor competition from the Internet, nor the impact of DVRs on commercial viewing. In fact, he remains one of broadcast's biggest champions, despite increased competition from other media.

"The most interesting statistic that nobody is writing about is that your favorite show, be it CSI, American Idol or Desperate Housewives, is only watched two out of four times by the most loyal viewers all season," he explained. "Therefore DVRs and the Internet become more and more important not to get people to sample your show for the first time but to get those people to watch those other two times. So the loyal viewer of CSI will now watch four out of four times. They'll only watch it twice on Thursday nights at 9 o'clock, but the other two times they'll get it. I want to make that available anytime, anywhere, anyplace. I think we can do that."

Moonves was quick to note that broadcast is still "the best game in town" for advertisers. "CPMs have gone up because we’re still more valuable than anybody else," he said. "There may be fewer viewers, but it's still the most intense place to get your product across."

Further, he added, reports about recent losses of broadcast viewers have been greatly exaggerated, depending on your point of view. "This past year we lost viewers," he admitted. "But if you were to count DVR penetration the amount that we lost would have been rather miniscule. Then, when you truly count the Internet, it would have been almost flat from a year ago. I don't necessarily buy that [advertisers] are buying [fewer] viewers. They're buying the same amount of viewers in different places.

"There's more DVR usage," Moonves continued. "But DVRs are getting counted, and you're seeing that they are not as disastrous to commercials as everybody thought. Nobody would have thought that only [about] 45 percent of people zap commercials. Not only that, but commercials you zap through are still effective to a certain extent. When you see that Crest toothpaste logo, that goes into your brain. More and more people are going to be viewing [commercials] with the logo throughout.

"By the way, if I'm lying in bed with my wife, she'll zap the commercials," Moonves laughed. "I won't. It would take me a minute to figure out how to do it. I'll just sit through it and watch it."

Despite his unwavering enthusiasm in the face of mounting competition, Moonves is bugged by continuing assertions in the press that CBS is a network for old people.

"We don't like the perception of CBS," he stated. "I think the perception is a misconception. We're in second place in 18-49! You guys still write about us like we have Murder, She Wrote on the air.

"I think our shows are underrated," he continued. "I think our network is underrated. We're written about like the old fogey network. More people watch CBS!

"By the way," he said to the newspaper reporters in the group, "your demos match our demos. So give us a break."

Speaking of demos, Moonves asserted, "The phrase '18-49 is the only demo that is valued by advertisers' is not true! That's the biggest misconception. Most of my competitors only send out 18-49 [ratings information]. CBS is No. 1 by two million people per night. That's a lot of people. Nobody writes that!"

Moonves noted that CBS is often "accused of being too traditional," but said he doesn't mind. "Two and a Half Men, for my money, is the best comedy on television right now," he declared. "It's the highest rated and it doesn't get written about nearly as much as some of the comedies on other networks on Thursday night. The ratings on Two and a Half Men are superior. The show is as good as any comedy on television. If you could see the amount of press Two and a Half Men gets compared to some of the other network comedies it would be one-tenth as much. It is being ignored. [The failed Fox comedy] Arrested Development probably got ten times the press that Two and a Half Men got!"

Does this mean Moonves thinks traditional comedies are better than single camera comedies?

"I'm not saying that," he said. "I like those NBC comedies. I think they're great. But I like my ratings better!"

When I asked Moonves about the somewhat eccentric and eclectic new series CBS will premiere in the fall, he replied, "We did a number of pilots. We looked at them all. These were the best we had. As [CBS Entertainment president] Nina [Tassler] has said, if there had been a procedural that was great, we would have gone with it. The best made it on the air. We did some procedurals. We did some fastballs down the middle this year that just weren't as good. It wasn't the genre. It was what was good.

"Did we want to stretch? Yes. [But] we're not reinventing the wheel with Cane. The Big Bang Theory? Pretty traditional. Viva Laughlin, Kid Nation? We're going for it. We also have a very strong bench. We have Amazing Race on the bench. We have Swingtown, which we love, which is pretty daring. We have The New Adventures of Old Christine on the bench. So we're very strong, midseason wise. It's okay to take a couple of chances in time periods. You know, Wednesday at 8 o'clock we weren't knocking it out of the ballpark. I don't think it's a big stretch to say we can do better with Kid Nation. I don't think it's a big stretch to say we can do better with Moonlight on Friday than we did with Close to Home. Viva Laughlin is a bit of a risk, but that's okay.

"You should have seen the scheduling room," he laughed. "It was war! People were screaming at each other. It was great! Bring it on! I want passion! All you need is 16 percent who love the show in America and you're a hit. You don't need 40 percent anymore. You get 16 percent of the viewers who love your show and you're a big hit."

Those are the words of Sharrell Shaw, whose husband, SSGT Alan W. Shaw of the United States Army, was killed in action on February 9 of this year. Mrs. Shaw's remarks are part of a brief tribute to her late husband that will be telecast on the Military Channel this Saturday, one of many dedicated to fallen soldiers that the network will run throughout the day.

Mrs. Shaw doesn't simply speak of her disappointment with news coverage of the war in Iraq or her observation that people with loved ones who are actually engaged in combat tend to feel isolated from those who do not have family members serving in the military at this time. "My husband was there during the first elections," she recalls during the tribute to SSGT Shaw. "He called me and told me how good it felt to shake the hands of men who had voted for the first time in their life and how wonderful it was to look in the eyes of women and see the pride they had in themselves and their country being able to vote for the first time."

One of her final comments says it all: "I've got a 10 year old who is bound and determined to join the Marine Corps one day so he can be like his dad."

So much of television news is so overproduced these days, with bottom of the screen crawls, on-screen graphics, pounding music, orchestrated confrontational interviews and rapid editing, that the humanity of the people being reported on in stories often seems buried beneath it all. By contrast, there is a mesmerizing power to the simplicity of these Military Channel tributes, which consist of handsomely lit people shot in close up against a black backdrop, quietly reminiscing about their lost loved ones. Pictures and words occasionally appear on screen, but the message of each person is never lost or compromised.

These tributes were produced in partnership with the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors. Everyone should take time to view at least a couple of them. (They will also be available on Discovery.com .) And then everyone should ask, given the countless hours of news programming on television and the Internet, can't all those network and cable reporters and anchors and interviewers quiet down for a moment and run a daily 60-second tribute to a fallen soldier? Give names to some of the numbers reported every day? Would anyone actually object? (Dare I suggest that such tributes be sponsored if money is an issue?) Sometimes the best way to get a story across and keep it in the forefront of viewers' thoughts is to simply let real people talk and showcase them as they do so, without a lot of interference.

Among the other service men and women killed in action in Iraq who will be honored Saturday on the Military Channel are Sgt. Thomas M. Gilbert of the U.S. Marine Corps (remembered by his father, Michael Gilbert), Sgt. Byron Norwood of the U.S. Marine Corps (remembered by his sister, Kristen Hullum, who notes, "I just want America to know the men and women who give their lives are not just numbers. They are somebody's loved ones."), ENS Elizabeth A. Bonn of the U.S. Navy (remembered with great joy and emotion by her mother, Debbie Bonn, who reminds us, "There are girls out there serving their country and they're doing it right next to the guys.") and SSGT Christopher O. Moudry of the U.S. Army (remembered by his wife, Karie Warfield).

Also, Lt. Col. Richard M. Wersel of the U.S. Marine Corps (remembered by his wife, Vivianne Wersel, who talks movingly about a hand-written letter her husband had sent her from Iraq in this era of electronic communication), SSGT Stephen J. Sutherland of the U.S. Army (remembered by his wife, Maria Sutherland), SFC Daniel A. Suplee of the U.S. Army National Guard (remembered by his wife, Bernadine Suplee, who lovingly refers to her late husband as "a nerd"), CPL Jeremy R. Shank of the U.S. Army (remembered by his brother, Christopher Shank), Capt. Nathanael J. Doring of the U.S. Marine Corps (remembered by his wife, Lisa Doring) and GySgt John D. Fry of the U.S. Marine Corps (remembered by his wife, Malia Fry, and sisters Melissa Inman and Laura Pricer).

You may not remember them forever, but you might think about these fallen service members and their families for days or weeks to come, and that will count for something.

And while I'm on the subject, you won't soon forget the ten soldiers living with extreme physical injuries and/or severe post-traumatic stress who are interviewed by James Gandolfini in similar sparse, straightforward fashion in the September 9 HBO special, Alive Day Memories: Home From Iraq. (I am ashamed to note that, when five of these young people took the stage during the recent Television Critics Association tour in Beverly Hills, a significant number of journalists in the room did not stand and applaud them.)

Further, if these stories about soldiers on Military Channel and HBO move you, don't miss The War, a 14-hour documentary by acclaimed filmmaker Ken Burns premiering on PBS September 23. That production begins with a reminder that approximately 60 million people worldwide died during the Second World War, which Burns referred to during his appearance at the TCA tour as "the greatest cataclysm in human history." The War is profound and essential television. It is the program of the year.

BACK: MONIQUE COLEMAN; ZAC EFRON; RICH ROSS, PRESIDENT, DISNEY CHANNEL WORLDWIDE; ASHLEY TISDALE; ANNE SWEENEY,CO-CHAIR & PRESIDENT DISNEY/ABC TELEVISION GROUP; KAYCEE STROH; GARY MARSH, PRESIDENT, ENTERTAINMENT, DISNEY CHANNEL WORLDWIDE; VANESSA HUDGENS; OLESYA RULIN
FRONT: RYNE SANBORN; KENNY ORTEGA; LUCAS GRABEEL; CHRIS WARREN, JR.

We're two days away from what may be the most eagerly anticipated telecast of the year -- Disney Channel's High School Musical 2, the not-too-long awaited sequel to last year's unexpected blockbuster. Among kids and tweens it's going to be even more popular than the year's other giant TV entertainment event, the season finale last May of American Idol. I suspect it's going to appeal to millions of teens and young adults, and adults who are young at heart, as well.

From there, HSM2 is pure, perfect fun. Returning stars Zac Efron, Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Tisdale, Lucas Grabeel, Corbin Bleu and Monique Coleman are all in fine form. (Grabeel and Bleu are especially outstanding in I Don't Dance, another super-deluxe song and dance number.) Together, they're the most perfect six-pack of young television talent the medium has produced since Friends debuted in 1994. And unlike that group, this gang is truly multi-talented.

It has been only 19 months since High School Musical made its January 2006 premiere, but the difference between that distinguished debut and this week's mammoth event are significant in many ways. Nobody predicted that the first film would be a historic pop-culture phenomenon, making overnight stars out of several young unknowns, turning a basic cable channel that had been struggling for recognition just a few years earlier into a television powerhouse, producing a hit soundtrack that became one of the first true sensations on iTunes and inspiring a national concert tour with most of the original cast (minus Efron, who was busy filming the current box-office hit Hairspray at the time) that sold out arenas from coast to coast and had to be seen to be believed. (My sympathies to any adult who did not bring earplugs.) The HSM tour (later released on DVD and telecast on Disney Channel) served in part as a monster promotional platform for the sequel. In fact, the concert ended with a giant image on the screen behind the performers heralding the impending arrival in Summer 2007 of HSM2, prompting ear-splitting, skull-cracking screams of delight from the thousands of kids and tweens in attendance.

Back in late 2005, not even the folks at Disney fully understood what they were about to experience. When Disney Channel made its presentation at the Winter Television Critics Association tour in January 2006, about one week before the debut of HSM, network executives played a couple of clips from the movie but spent their time instead focusing on an upcoming (and long-forgotten) Disney Channel Original Movie titled Cow Belles and the March 2006 premiere of another future phenomenon, Hannah Montana.

Tellingly, the only people who seemed to be fully aware of HSM and expected it to explode on arrival were the kids and teens to whom it was targeted. MediaVillage junior correspondent Maya Motavalli, who was 11 at the time, was asking me about the movie way back in November 2005 and insisting it was going to be a big hit. I hadn't heard of it when she first mentioned it. Apparently Maya and her classmates had been tantalized by previews on www.disneychannel.com and, later, free music downloads on iTunes.

The rest of us had to catch up -- and fast -- in January and February 2006.

Everything is different this time around. The press conference for HSM2 at the July 2007 TCA tour was standing room only, with reporters and critics from every significant publication in attendance. Zac Efron can currently be seen in hundreds of movie theaters as a featured player in Hairspray. He is also the current Rolling Stone cover boy and is smiling at millions of people this week from every newsstand and check out aisle in the land. The six leads from the movie have been seen and heard everywhere this month, promoting HSM2 and their own personal projects with equal feel-good enthusiasm. You can't escape the onslaught of publicity, promotion and marketing for this project.

Still, the tsunami of all things HSM doesn't have the deadening feel of commercial overkill that permeated life as we know it in advance of such would-be blockbuster movie sequels as the three most recent Star Wars epics or the last of the pre-Christian Bale Batman flicks.

That's a good thing, because this isn't the last we will see of High School Musical mania. There is a theatrical movie sequel in the works (rumored to be all about the Wildcats' senior year in high school) and a Broadway musical is said to be in early development. High schools across America are continuing to perform stage versions of the original HSM and next year will likely begin performing HSM2, as well. Speaking of those high school productions, later this fall Disney Channel will present High School Musical: The Music in You, a documentary from acclaimed filmmaker Barbara Kopple. It's about a production of HSM by a joint summer theatre workshop of two rival Fort Worth, Texas, high schools and the profound impact it had on the students, teachers, families and other area residents who became involved. If you aren't fully convinced that the HSM phenomenon is something special, wait until you see this film.

Check out the High School Musical Photo Gallery!

I can't think of anything negative to say about this fine program -- but after watching the first two parts I'm really fed up with the network's presentation of it.

I realize on-screen network logos -- or "bugs," as the networks once referred to them and which I continue to call them, simply because they "bug" me -- are here to stay. I have gotten used to the other promotional junk that appears during most television series and specials, and to the additional stuff placed on broadcast screens by their affiliates. I understand networks value their "bugs" and intrusive promos in this increasingly competitive and cluttered media landscape as a way of identifying themselves as viewers surf by them. (Frankly, the only time I would really like to see "bugs" is during commercials, because if I'm clicking around looking for a particular channel I'm not always sure what channels I'm clicking past if commercials are on them. Maybe if I saw the logo "bug" of the network I was looking for I would stop surfing and sit through the remaining commercials until the show began.)

But The Company is something special. Like AMC's Broken Trail last year (which is up for several Emmy Awards this year), it is a huge, exciting, high quality production the likes of which do not come along very often. It is an important program with a literate script and big-budget cinematic production values that enhances the reputation not only of its network but of cable television, as well.

I only wish TNT had seen fit to showcase The Company in the manner it deserves. I do not need to see animated graphics for The Closer and Saving Grace every few minutes throughout the telecast, pulling my eyes away from the action in the story. I could do without the TNT "bug" periodically appearing in the lower left corner of the screen, then shooting a white line all the way across the bottom of the screen that expands into a bar with still more information about what I'm watching, then disappearing altogether so that a new "bug" can materialize in the lower right corner, one that morphs into an ad for The Closer or Saving Grace.

But the most distracting graphic of all has been the bold, all-caps title treatment -- THE COMPANY -- splayed across much of the lower right area of the screen (with the TNT "bug" at right) during what feels like the entire presentation! There it sits, constantly competing for my attention with the show itself.

This isn't just another episode of a reality or drama or comedy series -- this is a one-time-only, attention-grabbing, award-worthy miniseries for intelligent television viewers. Just this once, couldn't TNT dial back the non-stop on-screen promotional stuff or at least shrink the promotional graphics down to a size that doesn't constantly annoy the eye?

Over on Spike, which is presenting weekly Sunday night episodes of the other high-profile miniseries of the summer, The Kill Point, there are on-screen graphics during the show, too. But as far as I can tell, they are limited only to the words Spike Original Series in very tiny print in the lower right corner of the screen. They do not distract at all from the thrilling story being told. If there has been any animated promotional junk on screen during The Kill Point I haven't seen it. Perhaps I have been so riveted by the tense drama and gripping action at hand that I simply haven't noticed.

HGTV's Design Star -- the best reality series of the summer -- also runs on Sunday nights (opposite The Company and The Kill Point, as luck would have it). It is jam-packed with all sorts of intrusive animated graphics promoting other series on the network and Design Star itself. I don't like such stuff during a show like this, either, but Star is so fast and splashy and colorful (especially when the competitors design their own full spaces, as they did this week) that the promos are easy to ignore. Tellingly, I can't recall the names of most of the shows that were aggressively promoted via intrusive graphics during Star Sunday night, because I was too caught up in the sheer fun of the show itself. (Todd's utterly distinctive surf room was a dazzling highlight.)

Some final thoughts about those annoying TNT "bugs" during The Company: Would anyone who has never watched The Closer watch it simply because they saw a Closer "bug" during another show? (I think not, but if I'm wrong, I wish TNT had stepped up and taken the hit this time around.) And, does anyone who religiously watches The Closer -- one of the very best cable series of the year, not just the summer -- need a reminder that it is on Monday at 9 p.m. ET? Again, I think not.

What do you think?

But I think the strangest trip inside television that I have ever undertaken occurred just a couple of weeks ago, when I toured CBS' Big Brother house in Los Angeles during the second full week of its current season.

I can sum it up in two words: "Human zoo."

I can sum it up in two words: "Human zoo."

I was awed by the first stop on the tour -- the Big Brother control room, where teams of producers and editors sit in front of control panels watching the action on the 42 video screens that cover the wall directly in front of them, pushing buttons and changing the images on the monitors to catch all of the important action or to give the houseguests some privacy. (Eric Stein, the mole who is manipulating the guests as America's Player this season, was taking a shower when we arrived in the control room. The camera in the bathroom remained in careful close-up on his face, visible over the top of the shower door.)

There are 54 cameras positioned throughout the Big Brother house that pump images to those video screens, and from there to the edited and live versions of CBS' Big Brother (telecast Thursday and Sunday at 8 p.m. ET and Tuesday at 9 p.m. ET) as well as the nightly live feed on Showtime Too (starting at midnight ET) and the 24/7 feeds available at www.cbs.com. (A couple of those cameras are located in the shower and bathroom stall, but they are never streamed to Showtime Too or the Internet.) There are 80-90 microphones in use. (The sound guy on duty during our visit was trying with limited success to edit kitchen noises out of the background. "Next year, nerf pots and pans!" he cried as we walked by.)

More than two hundred employees keep it all running, tirelessly gathering, editing and distributing content (and taking care of the houseguests) from July-September.

As dazzling as this display of state-of-the-art technology was, it didn't pack the punch of the very simple walking tour to follow. Led by exceedingly pleasant and personable executive producers Allison Grodner and Don Wollman, who function largely without sleep for the summer months, we were guided into the behind-the-wall tunnels that wrap around the edges of every room in the house. The tunnels are very dark; one side is lined with windows looking in on the rooms, the other is painted black, as are the ceiling and floor areas. There are tracks throughout, on which cameras glide around recording the activity inside the windows.

The windows are mirrored on the inside. When you are in these tunnels, you can see the humans on the other side of the glass, but they can't see you -- even when they are close enough to reach out and touch (if the glass wasn't in the way). As I passed one bedroom I saw "Evil" Dick Donato, who was nominated for eviction that week, busily packing his suitcase in anticipation of his possible departure. He suddenly stopped and approached the mirror on his wall, as if he could see me looking at him. I froze. Then he began grooming himself, completely unaware that anyone was watching from the other side of the mirror. (Of course, all of the houseguests know that anyone can be on the other side of those mirrors at any time. Perhaps they develop a sixth sense that tells them when they are being watched. Or maybe they just get used to them and forget why the mirrors are there.)

Most of the young women were napping in their brilliantly lit bedroom. (The producers turn the lights out later in the evening to encourage the houseguests to maintain a somewhat normal sleeping schedule.) Many of the guys were outside in the courtyard playing croquet. Eric was in another bedroom getting dressed after his shower. "Evil" Dick's estranged daughter Daniele Donato was in the diary room talking to a camera. Nick Starcevic, the jock with whom she had a romance in the house, was parading around the kitchen in surf shorts. (He has since been evicted from the house.)

It was all very, very quiet. You cannot hear the houseguests in the tunnels, except when they are in the diary room, or if they are shouting. When you enter the tunnels you are asked to whisper as quietly as you can if you must speak at all. You walk in silence, stopping and staring at the humans on the other side of the glass, mesmerized by even the most mundane actions.

I could have stayed in those tunnels for hours, silently watching the humans in their habitat. While the experience had a voyeuristic quality to it, I was not actually engaging in voyeurism, because the people being watched deliberately put themselves on public display.

The words "human zoo" came to mind again and again, along with the phrase "social experiment."

When I exited the tunnels I was offered bowls of "slop", the protein-rich, grainy mixture that the houseguests are allowed to eat throughout their stays in the house. The "slop" contains everything a human needs to remain nourished and healthy. The houseguests are allowed to eat other foods when they win certain contests or engage in certain tasks. Otherwise it's "slop" for breakfast, lunch, dinner and all snacks. (Condiments are permitted.) The "slop" was bland and had the consistency of oatmeal, but it wasn't half bad. I finished my bowl. A fellow journalist went back for seconds.

Executive producer Don Wollman, who has been with Big Brother since it began in summer 2000, told me that the crew warms up for a week each year before the television and Internet programming begins. Temporary houseguests are recruited to live in the habitat during that time, as the cameramen, soundmen and editors rehearse and the producers get into limited-sleep mode. Then the real houseguests arrive and the drama begins, inside and outside their living space. Apparently hundreds of people volunteer to be one-week residents.

I think CBS should keep the Big Brother house populated on a year-round basis, even when the show isn't being telecast. No need for cameras or games, or the removal of guests on a regular basis. Just make it clear that life inside the house is rated PG-13 and let them do their thing for a few weeks. The network could charge a fee for a one-hour walk through the tunnels and could certainly monetize the online and on-demand opportunities. CBS could make a bundle.

Last Sunday, TNT launched the first segment of its thoroughly absorbing three-hour miniseries The Company, a drama about the early years of the CIA. Sunday's moody and atmospheric installment provided the kind of deliberate, thoughtful entertainment no longer seen on broadcast television, even during this golden age of contemporary drama. It had all the qualities of a fine feature film.

FX is in top form with its sizzling summer drama Rescue Me and the new legal thriller Damages. The first two episodes of Damages delivered so many shocking surprises that I'm not sure how series creators Todd A. Kessler, Glenn Kessler and Daniel Zelman can keep going for an entire season, but I'm totally hooked (though I could have done without the killing of Katie's dog in the opener). Series stars Glenn Close and Ted Danson are in fine form playing characters that are powerful, tormented, manipulative, twisted and, deep in their cold dark hearts, perhaps not on altogether opposite sides of the law.

As for Rescue Me, it's four years in and this manic comedy-drama still refuses to come up for air. I cannot wait for tomorrow night's episode. I mean -- Ho-lee God -- Tommy isn't going to drop baby what's-his-name off that bridge, is he? I'm sure that in some people's minds the image at the end of last week's show was enough to condemn Denis Leary's archly conflicted character to hell, regardless of what comes next. Such is the ballsy game that Leary and his equally devilish co-executive producer Peter Tolan continue to play.

USA Network has added the very enjoyable Burn Notice to its roster of consistently entertaining summer series, which includes Monk, Psych, The 4400 and The Dead Zone. Along with Eureka on the Sci Fi Channel, these are solid, satisfying shows that remind me of "traditional" television, and I mean that in the very best sense. They entertain me and engage my imagination without leaving me emotionally drained or shaken by what I have just seen. I can kick back and relax with them, especially Psych, a crime drama with comedic elements that makes me laugh more frequently than many of the so-called comedy series on television today. James Roday and Dule Hill are a sensational comic team, even under the most dramatic circumstances.

The fact that certain networks are unexpectedly behind some of this summer's best new dramas is as surprising as the shows themselves. Spike -- yes, that Spike -- has a dandy summer psychodrama-thriller in The Kill Point, about the prolonged hostage negotiations that follow a bank heist by military veterans gone terribly wrong. John Leguizamo and Donnie Wahlberg are delivering Emmy-caliber performances -- Leguizamo as Mr. Wolf, the leader of the vets who is slowly losing control of the increasingly dangerous situation, and Wahlberg as driven hostage negotiator Horst Cali. The eight-hour Kill Point is already at its midpoint (four hours remain), but it's not too late to check it out.

And then there is AMC, the movie network that has delivered what may be the most highly praised new series of the year, Mad Men. It's about ruthless advertising executives in 1960 Manhattan, and the show's sets, costumes, atmosphere and pacing brilliantly re-create that era. (A warning: Watching so many people smoke so much of the time, unaware of the mammoth national health crisis to come, may actually make you feel sick.) So far, the brilliance and the beauty of this show are in the frequently seductive details and appropriately restrained performances. Sooner or later, though, a truly compelling storyline will have to kick in if Mad Men is going to take off. I'm willing to give it time.

Even Lifetime has come through with surprisingly strong dramatic series this summer. After years of sluggish shows that were often irritating to watch, the network suddenly has two very appealing dramas in Army Wives and Side Order of Life. The network's other brand new series, State of Mind, is not as strong as these two, but it is a fine dramatic showcase for the endlessly engaging Lily Taylor, and that counts for a lot.

Significantly, all of this quality drama on basic cable has momentarily left the pay cable networks in the shadows. HBO's Big Love is better in season two than it was in season one, but for pure emotional satisfaction it doesn't hold up against most of these shows, and John From Cincinnati continues to leave me cold.

The real excitement this summer on pay cable is in the scripted comedy arena. HBO's hilarious Entourage remains a class act and a delightful diversion. Next week, Weeds will return to Showtime's schedule, along with a very adult new comedy, Californication, starring David Duchovny. I'm not sure if all the sex in the opening episode of Duchovny's show will draw viewers in or leave them cold, but I am certain that the funny and organic surprise at the end will bring them back for week two.

As for Weeds, season three opens at full, frenzied blast. Giddy, gritty and gutsy, it is the very definition of breathless comic entertainment, and series leads Mary-Louise Parker and Elizabeth Perkins are simply sensational. How many other television comedies are actually thrilling to watch?

It wasn’t all that difficult to come to that conclusion while wandering the aisles and hallways of the massive convention center in San Diego last weekend during Comic-Con.

During the short walk from my hotel to the convention center on Saturday morning I had t-shirts and posters for the upcoming NBC series Chuck, postcards for the new CW thriller Reaper and bumper-stickers for Showtime’s Dexter thrust at me from every direction. (A plane crisscrossed the city’s airspace all day Friday and Saturday trailing a banner with the same message that was on the stickers: I Love Dexter.) It seemed that everyone around me was carrying something on behalf of one of these shows, or one of the giant Smallville tote bags that were handed out inside the convention center at the Warner Bros. booth.

The number of impressions made by such stuff, inside and outside the convention center, was impossible to calculate. So is their collective value.

After a couple of hours spent working my way through thousands of comic, movie and television fans to gaze at the millions of products being sold in hundreds of vendor tables, with stops at the very crowded studio and network booths where casts from a number of television shows were autographing all kinds of things for all kinds of fans (many of them in costumes), I wandered upstairs with a friend and sat in one of the hallways near the enormous rooms where programming presentations and panels were offered to thousands of fans, hour after hour, day after day. We happened to be sitting in the hallways where a huge line was forming for an upcoming script read by the cast of Family Guy. (Not every presentation was centered on a science-fiction property. Animated shows such as Family Guy and Futurama were also part of this event.)

As we sat and watched the formation of this massive line it became clear that everyone in it was absolutely thrilled to have the opportunity to stand around for an hour simply to be in the same room as the voice actors from Family Guy. Surely, they couldn’t wait to whip out their cell phones or get home to their computers and share their joy. I had this same feeling sitting in cavernous rooms with thousands of rabid fans during panels featuring the stars of Sci Fi Channel’s Eureka and Battlestar Galactica. They were there, in part, to let the world know they were there.

Ask yourself, even if only one half of these people e-mailed or text-messaged their friends or updated their MySpace or Facebook pages with stories, photos and videos of what they heard or saw in Comic-Con panels, not to mention on the convention floor, how many favorable impressions would be delivered directly to the very people that the networks and studios want to reach? At a minimum the number has to be in the tens of millions.

This is a level of super-charged viral marketing that could not even be imagined just a few years ago, and the networks and studios take total advantage of it at Comic-Con in a way that thrills their desired consumers.

Where does the new reality of such digitally driven viral marketing leave “traditional” entertainment journalists, whose reach rarely exceeds the circulation of their newspaper or magazine? How can they compete against the combined impact of tens of thousands of eager, digitally empowered fans, their excitement masterfully stoked by networks and studios?

An interesting observation: Network, studio and personal publicists now attend Comic-Con to manage their clients’ interaction with the press. (I’m told there were approximately 1400 credentialed journalists on site.) But those same publicity folks carry no weight whatsoever with the masses of “ordinary” people who are responsible for the bulk of the buzz emanating from the Con online, on phones and elsewhere. The fanboys and fangirls would just as soon trample a testy publicist than miss an opportunity to get within twenty feet of Jensen Ackles, Justin Hartley or Tricia Helfer and let all of their MySpace friends know what they are like in person.

The power of this new breed of citizen marketers is only going to grow, especially in the entertainment arena. There are other comic book and fantasy conventions during the year, including the fast-growing New York City Comic-Con, which will mark its third birthday in February, and any one of them could explode as another massive marketing resource. All I know is, San Diego is the mother of them all and will likely stay that way, given its close proximity to Hollywood and the ease with which producers and actors can drop in to promote their properties and feel the love.

Lois Lane gets a job at the Daily Planet and sees Supergirl's spaceship!

The Daily Planet gets a new editor!

Kara, a.k.a. Supergirl, will be a rebel who will clash with Lois and Clark!

And -- Lana lives!

These tidbits and others were revealed to MediaVillage last weekend during a brief conversation with Smallville creators Al Gough and Miles Millar and series stars Erica Durance, Laura Vandervoort and Justin Hartley at the San Diego Comic-Con.

Hartley, who last season portrayed the Green Arrow and his alter-ego, billionaire Oliver Queen, "will be back in mid-season for a couple of episodes," Gough said. The Arrow isn't coming back to wrap up his storylines or be killed off, even though Hartley has been cast in a new sitcom for The CW titled Eight Days a Week with Mario Lopez. Oliver remains a presence on the show, even when he isn't on camera.

"Oliver is definitely someone Clark can call on when he needs to," Gough explained.

The return of the Arrow is definitely good news for Clark, but what about Lois, with whom Oliver shared a brief romance? Is it over between them?

Durance cried, "Oh, yeah! What's that they say about a woman scorned?"

"Let me put it this way," Gough added. "When Lois and Oliver meet again there's not going to be any doe-eyes or weeping from Lois. But I think there will always be feelings there."

Lois will have a lot going on next season. "She's going to be hired at the Daily Planet," Gough revealed. She's also going to become involved with the new editor of the newspaper. "There's a new young editor who is brought in to age down the Planet," Gough continued. "The Planet is like the Gray Lady of Newspapers and now they want a younger, hipper audience, so they bring in a guy named Grant Gabriel. He takes an interest in Lois and in Lois' stories, especially with what she saw in the season finale [she was fatally stabbed but brought back to life via her cousin Chloe's previously untapped meteor-power] and what she's going to see in episode two - Kara's ship! Gabriel likes Lois' work and clearly has a romantic interest in her as well. It's going to be very Front Page."

Grant, Gough said, will be played by Michael Cassidy of The O.C. and Hidden Palms.

Kara, who was also sent to Earth during the final days of Krypton and was older than Clark at that time, has been in suspended animation for a while. Because she is so disoriented she is going to clash with both Lois and Clark when she first meets them.

The fight between Lois and Kara is going to be intense. But Millar said the "highlight" of first few episodes next season will be "a Lana-Kara showdown!"

Great Caesar's ghost! Does that mean Lana survived the explosion at the end of last season?

"Whoops!" Millar gasped. Then the comic backpedaling began. "She died in the explosion! Lana's dead! She died!

"There's a reason I don't do these things," he laughed, referring to press interviews. "I reveal the secrets of Smallville!"

Vandervoort described her first day on the Smallville set as "overwhelming" but positive. "Everyone was very comforting," she said.

"Laura did a great job," Gough raved. "There is a lot of fan curiosity about how [the introduction of Supergirl] is going to work. It's hard coming in to an established series with an established cast playing an iconic character."

"I know exactly how that goes!" Durance laughed. (She joined the series as Lois Lane in its fourth season.)

Vandervoort said she hasn't seen the Supergirl feature film, which bombed during its theatrical release. "I don't want to [see it] because I want to play it my own way," she explained. But she does feel a connection to the film. "The Supergirl movie was made in 1984," she noted. "That's the year I was born!"

Is the character being introduced with an eye toward a possible lead in a spin-off series?

"That's up to the network," Gough laughed. "First they had Aquaman, then the Green Arrow [two popular characters who seemed custom-made for spin-offs that never came about]. Who knows?"

Gough added that despite her early fights with Clark and Lois, Supergirl is "good, but she's a rebel. She's going to do things her own way.

"Earth takes a little getting used to," he smiled.