How do we help the folks in East Africa and Southern Asia who are suffering? Should one give money? Blankets? Food? This is a question that has mattered to me since many years ago when I heard a popular performer tell me he'd semi-regretted hosting a telethon to aid people who'd lost their homes in a flood in the mid-west. Everyone's intentions (including his) were only the best…but this particular telethon had been encumbered with red tape and way too many paid staffers. And as a result, though the telethon had raised a decent sum of cash, way less than half of it had actually been put to good purpose, and even that distribution took months. The performer said that after hosting that seemingly-successful telethon, he'd been deluged with requests to helm others, and that he'd declined most…not because the causes were not worthy but because, he said, he'd decided to confine his fund-raising and personal donations to only the most efficient efforts. Makes sense to me.

So yesterday, I called a friend of mine who works for a disaster-relief charity and asked, in effect, how one gets the most bang for one's donated dollars at the moment. Her answer was that really, while donations of food and goods always feel like "doing something," unless the final recipients are local, you're just saddling the charity with problems. So what should you give? Her reply:

There are really only two things that matter — money and, when they're short, blood. If you call us up and say, "I've got ten cases of canned food here for starving people overseas," I have to start looking in the budget for a way to get it from you and then get it to them, and that can be expensive and take time. If you give us money, I can have that money feeding hungry people in twenty-four hours.

The charity she works for is only peripherally involved in the current Africa/Asia efforts but I'll bet it works that way with most causes. She said that if one donates to the Red Cross or the Salvation Army, very little of the money goes to administrative concerns. "You can't put the money to much better use than to give to them," she said. "And the Red Cross can also tell you if they have a special need for blood at the moment."

So here's a link to a page where you can donate to the Red Cross. And those of you who were thinking of donating to this site…please double or triple the amount you were going to send me and send it there, instead.

Here's an old article that gives a great overview of Mr. Orbach's performing career.

I never thought it was "real" improv, as proven by the large number of experienced comedy writers listed as producers and consultants on its end credits…but I still enjoyed the American edition of Whose Line Is It Anyway? hosted by Drew Carey. I watched 'em when ABC ran them in prime time and I watched reruns on the ABC Family Channel until I got sick of seeing the same episodes repeated over and over. So it's nice to hear that starting January 17, ABC Family will be running what they're calling "new" episodes. I suspect they'll be filtering them in with the reruns I don't want to watch again but perhaps my TiVo can figure out the difference.

There seems to be some confusion as to just what these "new" episodes are. When Whose Line? went off ABC, there were reportedly a number of shows that had not aired, and some sources are saying that these are the ones that will start next month. Other sources claim that any leftover episodes from the end of the network run have already aired on ABC Family and that what they're doing now is to go back to the old tapes and build new episodes out of leftover material. One of the quiet secrets of both versions of Whose Line? (British and American) is that at each taping, they played many more games than necessary to fill out a half-hour, then chose the best ones to air. This is why, at the end of each game, the performers always return to their chairs, even if they're in the next bit. It makes it easier to chop out or rearrange segments if they all start with all four players seated.

If that's what they're doing — using material that failed to make the cut the first time around — this would probably mean a lot of bits taped during the show's first year. That season, they usually taped for 2 hours and whittled it down to one half-hour show. In later years, they generally taped a little longer but would cut the proceedings into four or even five shows. Does anyone have any firm details on whether this is what's being done?

One hopes they'll also run the one "lost" episode from the program's first season on ABC. One night in 1999, the show was preempted at the last minute by a Barbara Walters interview of Monica Lewinsky, and the scheduled episode never ran. Fans assume that this was because it was one of the few without Wayne Brady, who by then was becoming one of the most popular folks on the series. (His slot in that episode was filled by Patrick Bristow, who had appeared on the British version of Whose Line?) It would be nice to see it for the first time instead of the episode with Richard Simmons for the eightieth…and the points still won't mean a thing.

It's hardly the worst news in the papers today but I was still sad to read of the death of Jerry Orbach. Most folks probably know him for his appearances on Law & Order and other dramatic roles…but a lot of us think of him as a genuine star of Broadway musicals. Matter of fact, Orbach was in the first Broadway musical I ever actually saw in a Broadway theater, 42nd Street. He played the role of the callous, all-business Julian Marsh, who produced musicals but didn't seem to have any music in his soul. That was until about midway through the second act when suddenly, thrillingly, he burst into song with "Lullaby of Broadway." It was one of those "tingle" moments and it worked because Jerry Orbach was just so darn good.

Over on his fine comics news weblog, my friend Tom Spurgeon says that he fears we're about to see a lot of political/editorial cartoonists operating in a climate of fear. Here…I'll quote Tom's key sentence…

…with the newspaper business being what it is and more and more eyes at all levels of journalism on the bottom line, I don't see where any real resistance is going to come from if a set of complaints against a single work or editorialist were to build critical momentum.

I think Tom's right and wrong but mostly right. Once upon a time, the press in this country believed that the news was the news, and you report it as per established rules, regardless of whether it's what your readers want to hear. Now, more and more, people seem to want their news to reinforce what they already believe and to be free of facts or opinions to the contrary. More and more in this Rupert Murdoch world of ours, some news organizations are happy to pander to that need, while others increasingly fear offending anyone…even tiny groups if they're vocal enough. Which is bad news for this generation's Herblocks. You can't be much of a political cartoonist if you offend no one. It's not difficult to imagine editors or publishers folding if a small band of The Offended all make enough noise at the same time about some artist. With the F.C.C. doling out "indecency" fines based on a handful (as in, "less than five") complaints and advertisers sidestepping controversies every which way, it doesn't take a lot of bodies to form an angry mob.

The one area where I might part company with Tom — and I'm not sure if we agree or disagree on this — is that I think the free market should operate in this area. I don't think editors should be quick to drop cartoonists, and they especially should not do so in response to these little ginned-up, phony enraged protests. But it's also possible for a cartoonist to offend to no good purpose and/or spread disinformation, and those folks shouldn't be able to claim the First Amendment as immunity from getting replaced by someone better. It's not as bad with editorial cartoonists but lately, we've seen some incredibly shoddy "journalism" practiced by non-cartooning political commentators (Example: The thankfully-retiring William Safire). A few have even meekly advanced the argument that if something is clearly an opinion column, normal standards of factual accuracy do not apply.

I guess what I'm getting at here is that I think there are some lousy editorial cartoonists out there. I'm not sure the folks who control today's news media know how to differentiate between dropping one because he's ticking off readers who can't cope with alternate viewpoints…and one who's just plain uninformed or unfunny. Tom's right that there's a clear and present danger that the good ones will get dumped or pressured to tone it down. But there's also a danger that the standards for political cartooning will continue to descend, right along with the rest of most editorial pages.

Happy birthday to "Smilin'" Stan Lee, presiding guru of the Marvel Universe of Comics. That's him at right in the above photo posing with Lou Ferrigno, who played The Hulk on the 1978 TV series. If these two guys decide to do a fight scene, my money's on Stan.

The folks behind SaveDisney.com periodically send out e-mails with little quotes from Walt Disney. I just received this one…

"No one person can take credit for the success of a motion picture. It's strictly a team effort. From the time the story is written to the time the final release print comes off the printer, hundreds of people are involved — each one doing a job — each job contributing to the final product. And — if the picture wins an award, the feeling of satisfaction…can rightfully be shared by each and everyone."

Nice quote, quite true in some sense…but it does set you to wondering. Mr. Disney was not exactly lavish with the promotion of any name but his own. After he passed, his studio kept up and probably intensified the notion that it was the studio, not any human beings in particular, that made the magic. You can take the above remarks at face value to say that everyone contributes…or you can take it as a way of trivializing the individual contribution of each participant. If no one who works on a Walt Disney picture can be singled-out, then the only name that can garner any credit for the film is Walt Disney.

Last evening at a party, I was chatting with Richard Sherman, who among his (and his brother's) many credits are all the songs and even some story input to Mary Poppins, a movie has endured beyond all expectations. There's a new, very fine DVD out (order it here) with a great transfer…but the main reason to buy it is that it has several superb featurettes and "making of" glimpses, including a terrific segment where Sherman sits around the piano and discusses the score with Dick Van Dyke and Julie Andrews. The extras document a lot of the individual contributions that went into that "team effort" and remind you that it wasn't the studio that made that movie. It was human beings.

Two of those human beings, of course, were the Sherman Brothers…and they're sure having quite a season. Right now on London's West End, you can see hit stage musicals based on two of their movies — Mary Poppins and Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. The latter is soon to open on Broadway in this country with the former sure to follow. Like a lot of you, I grew up on Sherman Brothers music. Nice to think that another generation is getting that opportunity.

(Before I forget: Jim Hill has two terrific articles about Mary Poppins — and plans for a sequel that never happened — over at his site. Read this one first, then read this one.)

As we reported here, it looks like the Trio cable channel is disappearing from DirecTV on the last day of this year. DirecTV is running an occasional crawl on that channel announcing this, and they've put out a press release and there's a statement on all the bills that are now arriving. They've told everyone except the TiVo folks, whose program listings still display Trio information on DirecTV channel 315 well into 2005 and will allow you to program to record shows on that channel you won't be receiving then. (I assume this is because there will still be some local cable companies carrying Trio, so not every TiVo owner will lose it. But it won't be on Channel 315 much longer.)

If you're a DirecTV subscriber, you might want to record one last show on Trio before it goes away. At 6 AM (West Coast time) on 12/31, they're running Final Cut: The Making of Heaven's Gate, the documentary I recommended in the above-linked news item. I assume it will surface elsewhere but it might be a while.

No word yet on whether this means the end of Trio but if you have 20 million subscribers and you suddenly lose 12 million of them, it will probably have some impact.

You only have a few more days to savor the classic Walt Kelly Pogo Christmas strips which we've put up over at The Official Pogo Possum Website. Nobody, as you'll see, ever did Christmas strips better than Mr. Kelly and we've posted eight examples over the last few days, plus we have the definitive, accept-no-substitutes lyrics for the classic carol, "Deck Us All With Boston Charlie," which sure beat going "fa-la-la-la-la" when you hear that all-too-familiar tune. We'll have some other Pogo surprises up at the Pogo website in '05 but for now, go enjoy the Christmas strips before they melt away.

My pal Kim "Howard" Johnson — who knows more about Monty Python than any man, woman or child alive — reports on the new Monty Python musical, Spamalot.

While we're talking Python, one of those silly "best ever" surveys was recently held to select the funniest scene ever in a motion picture. Coming in at first place was the scene in the Pythons' Life of Brian about "What have the Romans ever done for us?" Debating these lists is almost as pointless as conducting them but I have to say I not only don't think that's the funniest scene of all time in any movie, I don't even think it's the funniest scene in that movie. I'd pick the scene at the window where Brian confronts the crowd…and maybe one or two others before I'd get to the one the survey chose.

If forced at gunpoint to pick the funniest scene ever in any motion picture, I'd probably select the "Springtime for Hitler" musical number in The Producers, with the audience sitting in abject shock and right in their midst, the author of the play enjoying the hell out of it. And then a number of Python scenes, including the one I mentioned from Life of Brian, would also make my top ten. Some of the others they select would not even make my top hundred.

If you're a fan of the movie Vertigo, you will love this site. If you're not, you may still find it interesting.

This holiday evening, we're thinking good thoughts in the direction of comic book legend Will Eisner, who's in an intensive care ward at this very moment, recovering from a quadruple heart bypass operation on Wednesday. Word is that the creator of The Spirit (and some of the best graphic novels of recent years) came through it well and is expected to make a full recovery. Will — he won't mind me saying this — is 87 years old but has always displayed an energy and inventiveness that puts younger cartoonists to shame. The doctors say he won't be able to go back to work for 6-8 weeks. I'm guessing he'll be drawing by New Year's.

Yes, I understand that "use a pun, go to prison" is a parody of the law enforcement motto, "use a gun, go to prison." What I didn't get — and maybe I was trying to be more logical than necessary — was what going to prison had to do with the strike at the Comedy Store. Was the idea that if one of the striking comics used a pun, he was in legal trouble? Or that the scabs who did puns on stage were going to the hoosegow? The joke never quite made sense to me, and I'm sorry I mentioned it because it wasn't worth the trouble. But thanks for the notes, everyone. I really do appreciate the fine Response Team that reads this weblog.

David Letterman, who rarely ventures out of his own studio these days to do remotes, sprinted off to Iraq the other day to entertain troops there. Here's a nice report with lots of photos and such.

Comedians who work comedy clubs in New York are threatening to go on strike. Time to haul out the picket signs that popped up back in 1979 (?) when comics in Los Angeles picketed The Comedy Store, The Improv and other such establishments not for better pay but for any pay. The placards said things like…

• No bucks, no yucks
• No money, no funny
• Use a pun, go to prison (I never quite understood that one, even though I carried it one evening)
• Catch a rising scab
• Stand up for your rights

And so on. In hindsight, it seems amazing that human beings had to go on strike to establish that they should be paid when they performed the most important job at some very profitable operations. Even more amazing was that there were those who said, "It'll spoil the business if the comedians are paid." They even called it a "business," forgetting that in a "business," people get paid. Eventually, the comedians were paid — not a lot, but it was a nice precedent — and the dire predictions did not come true. I assume the current New York squabble will be settled with the comedians getting more, no matter how much the club owners may plead ruination.