Coming Soon: The New Game Show Era

Tim O’Donnell, who makes a nice living writing, producing and directing sitcoms, recognized a while back that his profession faced a growing threat as installments of “Dateline NBC” spread across prime time like a locust swarm. Today, a new peril is causing Maalox moments in TV writing rooms.

“The five scariest words to a sitcom writer used to be ‘And now, here’s Stone Phillips,’ ” O’Donnell quipped, referring to the perfectly coiffed “Dateline” host. “Now they’ve become ‘Is that your final answer?’ ”

“Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” is not anyone’s final answer to what ails television. It is, however, the perfect short-term solution in a business that increasingly seems to rely on the quick fix and getting by, where possible, on the cheap.

Consider the program’s merits from a network executive’s perspective: High ratings. Relatively low production costs. No stars, unless you count host Regis Philbin, and somehow you suspect three or four other people could just as easily say, “Sure, Washington is on the one-dollar bill. You’ve just won $1,000!” should Regis become too big for his britches.

It gets better. The show causes no concern about its content (ABC rates it “TV-G”), meaning there’s little to offend special-interest groups. Even Steve Allen, who has kept his face in the newspapers by fronting for TV watchdog group the Parents Television Council, would be hard-pressed to suggest “Millionaire” is poisoning children’s minds, unless he thinks there’s something inherently wrong with knowing the order in which Madonna’s first four albums were released.

There are also no battles with writers who want to use novel terms to describe sex acts, bodily functions or human organs. The only reason you’ll hear the word “ass” on this show is to find out who rode one into Bethlehem: A) Mary and Joseph; B) William and Mary; C) Adam and Eve; D) Procter and Gamble.

In short, “Millionaire” is a perfect vehicle for what broadcast television primarily exists to do: not entertain, not inform, but at its most basic level, deliver eyeballs to advertisers by keeping people staring at the screen before, during and after the commercials.

Of course, television achieves far more than that at times. In just the last few weeks there have been countless examples of the medium’s power to move us, from Alan Alda’s Alzheimer’s-stricken character on “ER” to a rape victim finally weeping--having remained stoic throughout a trial for murdering her assailant--on “The Practice.”

“Frasier” was funny, as was “Everybody Loves Raymond” when Ray began to suspect his wife’s interest in sex was being spurred by her hunky aerobics instructor. Ally McBeal created a ruckus by kissing another woman, then fantasized about firing out babies with guest star Jason Gedrick.

Hollywood doles out awards to writers, producers and actors based on such moments, but the future of TV executives generally hinges on an entirely different process.

Do the math. NBC shells out $13 million per episode for “ER” in its sixth season, with several million more going to “Frasier” and “Friends.” Sources say “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” costs ABC about $300,000 to produce. At this point, its writers aren’t even working under union contracts or receiving guild benefits.

Granted, the show is devoid of the flashes of brilliance one might find in sitcoms and dramas. Its allure stems from suspense, a play-along element and the “Wheel of Fortune” paradigm, allowing viewers to feel delightfully superior to the people they are watching, unable to imagine how someone can be so dense as to be unable to solve the puzzle “JUL--A RO--ERT-- --N --RETTY WO--AN.”

Some network executives have rightfully pointed out there is nothing unique about “Millionaire,” unlike “Friends,” “The Drew Carey Show,” “Touched by an Angel” or “The Simpsons,” which help define the personality of their networks. Quiz shows, by contrast, will be a dime a dozen in no time--even on cable, which can easily afford to produce such fare but has made only minor inroads in providing top-notch sitcoms and dramas.

Still, television is a business where UPN’s management is being hailed for its decision to put on “WWF Smackdown!,” and the Fox executive in charge of specials, Mike Darnell, has done quite well overseeing such projects as “Shocking Moments: Caught on Tape” and “When Good Pets Go Bad.” The prevailing attitude in today’s corporate culture is best summed up by Raiders owner Al Davis’ mantra, “Just win, baby,” with the added proviso, “And do it now.”

To get a sense of where prime time may eventually be heading one need only look at daytime television, where a smaller audience pool has long required programmers to be more resourceful in what they spend drumming up each rating point.

In this climate, a soap opera such as “Another World” became expendable, prompting its cancellation in June after a 35-year run. Instead, we get inexpensive talk and court shows, both deriving their sense of drama not from a writer’s creativity but seeing society’s most hapless members on display. There are game shows, “relationship” shows, real-life video shows, shrill infomercial pitchmen and reruns, reruns, reruns.

Certain programs of this ilk have been finding their way into prime time, but none have exhibited the breakthrough potential of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire.” Previously viewed as singles hitters to fill out a lineup, they’ve now demonstrated that alternative genres can hit home runs--for the league minimum, no less, instead of all-star salaries.

In that respect, whatever ABC chooses to do with “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” once its sweeps run ends on Wednesday (and the network has yet to figure that out), the damage to O’Donnell and his brethren has been done. Marginally rated sitcoms and dramas will give way, at least temporarily, to quiz shows and other formats that can deliver the same audience--or maybe even a vastly larger one--for a fraction of the price.

This may not give voters as much to choose from when award time rolls around, but be honest: If you were one of those executives whose fiscal year ends with a presentation to News Corp.’s Rupert Murdoch, Disney’s Michael Eisner, Time Warner’s Gerald Levin or CBS’ Mel Karmazin, would you rather come to the table armed with an Emmy, or a “Millionaire”?

*

Brian Lowry’s column appears on Tuesdays. He can be reached by e-mail at brian.lowry@latimes.com.