Conan vs. Dave - really?

So the media states that, according to the Nielsen ratings system, David Letterman is whipping Conan O'Brien in the ratings war for late night TV. Uh huh. That means it is one of two things: 1. The majority of viewers in America are retarded or 2. the Nielsen system is broken. My opinion is a combination of the two.

For years now, television executives (from the lower rated networks, of course) have bemoaned the archaic Nielsen system as not being reflective of today's TV viewer. And I would have to agree. Firstly, I don't know anyone within any circle that is remotely related to me or close to people around me who knows someone who has a Nielsen box. Secondly, everyone I know has Tivo or a DVR to which they catch up on shows later. Thirdly, if CBS is the highest rated in households, it ain't my house nor anyone I know because 95% of what's on CBS is C-R-A-P. (I watch one CBS show - How I Met Your Mother - and nothing else.) Granted, I know one person who watches CBS, but that's one out of 20.

Considering how long it took people to catch on to the genius that is 30 ROCK, I can understand that people have to get used to Conan. It's unusual, especially for those used to Leno's lame pandering jokes and insincere and flippant manner, to see someone as bright and genuine as Conan. Is Mr. COB perfect? No. Even he has bad interviews (such as his sit down with the stiff and decidedly weird Eddie Murphy - what the hell happened, Eddie?), but it's usually the fault of the guest more than it is with Conan. COB is at his best with guests who are not of the uber A List caliber and his wittiness comes through. Anyone who loved the old Simpsons episodes (when that show was at its best) can see the Conan touches in some of the best lines or situations or stories, and it's that genius he brings to the Tonight Show currently.

I especially loved last night's remote in which COB checked out a random auction of Hollywood items which were some of the creepiest and poorly constructed wax figures of Hollywood stars I have ever witnessed. Conan is there by himself, in a dark warehouse, surrounded by these A-list star figures which are made so badly that you can barely recognize the famous faces; it's absurd. COB also recognizes that absurdity by testing us to guess one wax celeb which I could not guess. Irony of ironies, the really ugly figure was that of Julia Roberts (who I have put on my sh*t list for her badmouthing of Conan).

Conan is hipper and skews towards a younger audience. Is that such a bad thing? Is COB maybe losing some of the old farts to Letterman? Probably, especially considering they didn't have to use their brains while watching Leno, so seeing Conan has got to be like watching a foreign program. This doesn't mean Letterman is as bad as Leno, but the old folks don't know that, so of course they'd rather tune it to Dave. That said, even if Letterman is smarter than Leno, his crotchety grumpy old man routine perfectly fits the prune juice crowd.

I don't blame the old for moving away from Conan. What irks me is the fact that the stupid ratings system can't acknowledge that the young ARE tuning in to Conan. And even if they weren't, they SHOULD be. I'm tired of stupid humor that claims to be smart when it doesn't do anything but reference pop culture and masks that as being smart (yeah, I'm talking to you Family Guy and Fallon). Conan is genuinely smart, funny, self-deprecating, and a genuine host and person. I don't know the man personally, but I know him as a host, and that's what should count.

So tune in to The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien. Btw, I love Kimmel too, but at least while there is a 30 minute difference between the two, I can still love both guys.

p.s. I don't hate Letterman. I have a lot of respect for the man who put "The Late Night with..." show on the map for NBC, but that Dave is long gone after his heartbreak of losing the spot he did deserve over Leno. But that's the past and it is what it is.