To the Networks:

Hi there. Let's get right to the point.

There are some shows that are going to be really popular, and there are some shows that will have smaller audiences. It's time that you embraced the idea that, by definition, not every show is going to be in the top ten.

If you have shows that are good, well-written, well-acted, and they have loyal, but (gasp!) smaller than top ten audiences, just keep the show for cryin' in the sink. I bet you there are some advertisers who can't afford to buy time during your blockbuster shows, but who would be more than willing to pay for some time on a middling-popularity sort of show.

Let me 'splain to you why this would be good. We, the viewers, wouldn't see the same blessed ads over and over again. Do you know what we do when we're inundated with the same damn ad over and over? We ignore it. It becomes part of the furniture. Some of us are so aggrieved that we mute the damn things, we're so sick of them.

So what do you think would happen if you had a wider variety of advertisers, based on a wider variety of fees? We'd pay more attention to ads! They might, you know, actually work, to make us want to buy things. You can back up your ability to sell their product.

And you know what else? Stop counter-programming popular shows with other shows that would be of interest to the same audience that watches the show you're programming it against. That just sucks. Some of us have to TiVo to see stuff because we're busy with the kiddos, or we, you know, just want to turn off the TV every now and again. Most of us don't have two TiVos or a dual-tuner one, so you make us have to choose.

Out of spite, I always choose the established show over the new one. Do you know why? Because you could have chosen any time to put it on, but you intentionally made me choose. You're the one causing the conflict, so I ignore the new show. This is why I don't watch Heroes, though I've tried to find my way into it with the Sci-Fi reruns (sadly, to no avail, because it just doesn't seem to hook me in). I know I can watch 'em online, too, but I didn't find that out until later, when I'd already tried a few reruns and didn't find it pulling me in.

But NBC, you put Heroes against 24. You made me choose, so I stuck with the network that DIDN'T make me choose. You lose a viewer, not that it much matters because that particular show is a hit without me and my ilk.

Instead of whacking all the shows that have the potential to attract the same sort of audience into the same damn time slot in some sort of network-based game of chicken, hows about programming them against unlike competition, so that people of differing tastes are served at the same time, albeit maybe (say it's not so) by your network at that particular time.

Now, I notice that the show "Thank God You're Here", which could be interesting to people who like comedy improv on against 24. You might not think that comedy improv and terrorism drama overlap, but I bet you a lot of the 24 watchers would give "Thank God You're Here" a try if they weren't on against each other. I think they're probably both younger audiences who like offbeat, break-the-rules sort of shows.

Why, when there are a week's worth of other choices? Why doesn't anyone put anything on against some of those asinine half-hour sitcoms or plethora of reality game shows?

Oh, screw it. The networks aren't listening to me, anyway.