Growing Up With A Drug Dealer For A Father

WWE's Vince McMahon wants to launch cable network

Vince McMahon's World Wrestling Entertainment Inc., wants to start its own cable network.

In an interview with Company Town, McMahon said he wants to launch the channel within the next two years and that he will pitch it as a network for the basic tier, which is the hardest one to get carriage on.

Launching a cable network is just the latest push in McMahon'seffort to remake the WWE. For years, WWE programming was a tough sellto advertisers and families because of its raunchy nature and sexualinnuendo. Now he's pushing a softer, gentler WWE. For more on hisstrategy, please read our story in today's Los Angeles Times.

Although this may not seem like the most ideal time to try to get a  network off the ground, McMahon's WWE has a pretty strong track record that cable and satellite operators will find hard to ignore. Whatever one thinks of WWE content, it does attract a big audience. USA Network's "Raw," for example, averages 5.5 million viewers and allof the WWE's shows on broadcast and cable combined average 16 millionviewers per week. WWE is also starting bringing in more blue chip advertisers, including AT&T, Pepisco and Procter & Gamble. 

McMahon is also a force on pay-per-view. WWE does about 14 pay-per-view events annually that attract anywhere from 500,000 to 1.4 million buys. In other words, he has some juice with distributors. With a library of over 100,000 hours of programming, he's not lacking for content.

"We have a lot of clout that most people don't," McMahon said. While WWE wants its own network, McMahon said he has no plans to take "Raw" off of USA or move any of his other properties.

"It won't be a threat, it'll be an integration," he said, adding, "it's good for `RAW' to be on USA." Of course, McMahon also knows it will also help him in negotiations with his partners. "Having your own network allows you a lot of leverage."

-- Joe Flint

Photo: WWE Chairman Vince McMahon. Credit: WWE

'Mad Men,' 'Love Among the Ruins': Talk amongst yourselves

As always, feel free to share your thoughts about this week's "Mad Men" in the comment area below if you wish. My previous "Mad Men" reviews and interviews are here.

If you want to read great "Mad Men" commentary and analysis, I can recommend the following sites (and some of these commentators don't post their weekly thoughts until a day or two after the episode airs, but have patience, they'll be worth the wait):

Land of Sepinwall, of courseTom and Lorenzo from Project RungayKeith Phipps at The Onion's AV ClubJames Poniewozik at Time (not sure if James is on vacation and if we're getting Robo-James this week, but in truth, I cannot tell James and Mecha-James apart. Don't tell him that. Update: It's not Mecha-James. Apparently.)Todd VanDerWerff at The House Next DoorKen Tucker at EW (he is right about one of the great lines in the episode)

I'm not writing the usual lengthy post this week because my father had a heart attack a few days ago. He's OK now. It was a moderate heart attack. "Moderate." Not sure I like that word. The whole thing felt much bigger than that. 

The good news is that he's finally home after four days in the hospital. We were lucky. But it's been a difficult few days. (By the way, if you saw me posting random things on Twitter and so forth, I've spent much of the last few days in hospital waiting rooms. And what is Twitter for, if not to distract us from reality? But if you don't see much on my blog this week, it's because I'm off Monday and playing it by ear the rest of the week.)

So anyway, do I want to comment at great length about an episode in which hard decisions have to be made about an aging parent? Not particularly. 

The episode, though, was about problem-solving. How does Don, amid a million pressures at work and home, solve the problem of Betty's father? How does Peggy solve the problem of not being charming to "regular guys" and failing to be seen as a pliable, eager-to-please mouse in the office? They both solve these problems in their own matter-of-fact ways. They make the decisions they need to make, and Peggy, for a night, becomes the person she needs to be -- if only to prove to herself that persona can be one of the tools in her toolbox.

Though it was difficult to see the situation with Betty's dad play out, The final scene in the episode made it clear that Don and Peggy, no matter what, would figure out how to solve their problems. They'd keep going. The world would keep changing around them, life would throw new things at them, but they'd find a way to push on. They'd both be on time for work the next day.

I have to respect that kind of tenacity. Both Don and Peggy have that survival instinct -- they will adapt, they will keep going, no matter what kind of adversity they face.

Maybe you all saw something else in the episode, but that is my half-formed reaction. I guess it's hard not to see the whole episode through the prism of my own recent experiences.

One slightly jarring thing in the episode -- as right as Kinsey's comments were about the destruction of Penn Station, why would he go into a meeting with Pete (a man known for being vicious to those who cross him) and a client and basically rip apart that client's project? Did Kinsey want to get fired? And why did Pete -- who knows his job as co-head of accounts is on the line every day -- let that go with no more than a couple of snide comments?

Again, I'm not in favor of what happened to Penn Station. That's not what I'm questioning here. It's just that Kinsey seemed to be inordinately reckless with a client and there appeared to be no repercussions for him regarding that turn of events. He can be a clod at times, but to survive that long at SC, Kinsey had to be more savvy than that. But it appears that because the plot required him to act that way, he did.

Lastly, a guess. I wonder if the last episode of the season -- or one of the last scenes of the season -- takes place at the ill-fated wedding of Roger's daughter. She's scheduled to get married the day after JFK's assassination. And I wonder if a scene at that wedding -- or scenes of the wedding being canceled -- may be "Mad Men's" oblique way of coming at that tragic event. Now, that's purely a guess. Perhaps the show will not deal with the assassination at all, though my gut feeling is that it will come in to play, in some way or other.

Anyway, enough from me. I guess, after all, I blathered on about the episode more than I thought I would. Sorry if it was less coherent than usual. Feel free to comment if you wish or go to the sites above for your weekly "Mad Men" commenting/commentary fix.

UPDATE: Thanks to many of you for your kind words regarding my dad. I've got a terrible head cold today (all the stress no doubt did a number on my immune system), so I am taking it easy and spending the day on the couch. Thus I have been able to read and respond to many of your comments below. It's been enjoyable to comment on the episode that way -- by responding to your thoughts. Thanks again.

Sponsored Link: Amazon's Mad Men Store

Director Ang Lee revisits the Woodstock era in the comedy 'Taking Woodstock'
Lee's film that looks remarkably like Michael Wadleigh's definitive 1970 documentary, 'Woodstock,' and includes re-creations of some of the most memorable scenes from the documentary. 'Those moments are so iconic that you just had to include them,' says Lee.
Growing Up With A Drug Dealer For A Father

Newsweek reporter Tony Dokoupil found out about his father's addiction to drugs early on in his childhood. But it was years later when he realized his father had been a successful drug dealer who made millions smuggling dope from Colombia. Dokoupil tells the story of reconnecting with his father.

RIGHTS-ARGENTINA: The Unfinished Story of the "Disappeared"
BUENOS AIRES, Aug 24 (IPS)"The night of Oct. 23, 1976, nearly 33 years ago, was the last time I saw my son Pablo. He was 17 years old, and he was terrified. Since then I have had no reliable news about his fate. My family and I have been left at the mercy of the anguished torments of our imagination."