Skip to main content

Alaska Daily

 


Finally got around to watching the pilot of Alaska Daily recently. 

I wondered about the pitch meeting, when someone persuaded a network exec to greenlight this. What was the high concept? "Lou Grant meets Northern Exposure!"? 

The central character, played by Hilary Swank, is a reporter named Eileen Fitzgerald who gets into some trouble in New York City and who sees Alaska as a chance to start over -- or at least as a refuge from her troubles where she can make a living doing what she loves while "working on her book" in her spare time.

This seems akin to the central character of most of the run of Northern Exposure, played by Rob Morrow, who is a doctor named Joel Fleischman who dreams of returning to New York but must serve out a contractual obligation to practice medicine in Cicely Alaska for four years by way of paying off his student loan.    

The milieu of much of the action of Alaska Daily, though, once the premise is settled and Eileen has moved in, is the newsroom. Though the main and the supporting characters often have to leave the newsroom for standard shoe-leather-dependent fact finding, the interest of the viewer is supposed to be held especially by the newsroom dynamics themselves, and the way the characters there interact. 

I do approve of the way they dramatize one of the regular conflicts within journalism: "beat sweetening."  Crime reporters think they have to play nice with desk sergeants, for example, because they will need desk sergeants to cooperate with them. If you burn the sergeant on a story, it may in fact help you get a great story that day, but it may lessen your ability to do your job down the road and for a long time. 

So: sweeten your beat?  Yes, but ... too much interest in sweetening means that police are playing you, and you have become their pr desk. It is a constant tug-of-war, and the argument plays out well in the first episode of Alaska Daily.

One final note. The fellow on the other side of the big desk from Hilary Swank in the photo above is Jeff Perry, whom you may recognized as Cyrus Beane of Scandal. He plays an old friend of Eileen's who is now her Alaskan boss and mentor, Stanley Cornik. He is very good here.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak