Diane Haithman and Ray Richmond contribute to Deadline TV coverage.
2ND UPDATE: Deadline never picked up these media rumors. Today Aaron Sorkin characterized them as “unsourced and untrue” that he had fired nearly all of the writers on The Newsroom.
Sorkin brought up the matter during HBO‘s presentation before anybody asked. Sorkin also said there is no truth to the second part of the rumor: That one of the writers, Corinne Kingsbury, is the only writer who was spared because she is Sorkin’s ex-girlfriend. The Daily repeated the rumors first, followed by The Hollywood Reporter. (No wonder The Daily is firing nearly 30% of its staff…) The stuff “got repeated all over the place,” Sorkin said.
“The writing staff was not fired, OK? Just seeing that in print is scaring the hell out of the writing staff. They are acting very strangely, they are coming to work very early … I want the old gang back. It is a fantastic group of men and women to come to work with.” Sorkin did cop to a couple of staffing changes he said were made at the end of the season but said that they were mostly promotions of two writers assistants to staff writers. (While he did not address that, there are reportedly 2 writers from Season 1 of Newsroom who are not coming back.) Sorkin also stressed that Kingsbury is not neither an ex- or current girlfriend: “She is on the staff for the same reason everyone else is on the staff.” He added: “I think she is at the beginning of a very exciting career and I would hate for this rumor impact her career or follow her around for the rest of her life,” Sorkin said of Kingsbury, adding jokingly: “That’s Kingsbury with a ‘g’.”
He added that he had no girlfriends, either previous or current, on the writing staff.
HBO at first canceled Sorkin’s TCA appearance. But Sorkin stressed afterward in the huddle that he would have none of that running and hiding from his critics. “I said, ‘No, reinstate it’,” Sorkin confirmed afterward.
“I wanted to talk to the press.”
(HBO at the time the rumors broke tried to throw cold water on them with a statement that said: “Every year each show reassesses the needs of its writing staffs. This process is nothing out of the ordinary.”)
Sorkin did say the show is in the process of adding paid consultants and said he would identify them when they are officially selected. He said their input could be “anything they want,” including their own personal stories or political expertise. After the session, Sorkin said of the consultants: “They’ll bring real experiences that they’ve had working in a newsroom. They’re also going to bring a political perspective that I don’t have. I’m hiring some really bright, interesting conservative minds who work in conservative politics who will help me bolster some conservative arguments for those moments when we talk about politics.” When asked whether the show was weaker this season because it lacked the conservative voices, he said: “I don’t, I don’t.”
Sorkin was also asked to address the decidedly mixed critical response to the show. “For sure we all know that there were critics who did not enjoy watching the first four episodes,” he said, to laughter. “ And there were critics that did. Obviously you’d prefer the praise be unanimous, but any time people are talking this much about a television show, it’s good for television, for people who watch TC, and people who work in TV.” He added that at HBO the entire season is in the can before the first episode airs so he cannot be tempted to tinker in order to please the critics. After the session, Sorkin said of his critics: “I don’t want to have an adversarial relationship with the press. I get that there are people who don’t like the show and are writing honestly about the show. But I don’t want to have that adversarial feeling.” He added: “I have to write the way I write and not write to change other people’s minds, because if 999 people like the show and one doesn’t, I will abandon those 999 people and try to get that one person to like me.”
Sorkin also spoke about the frequent criticism that his women characters, instead of coming across as smart and savvy, are ditzy. “I completely respect that opinion but I 100% disagree with it. They are every bit the equals of men. We plainly see them being good at their jobs.” He added that they evidence qualities of selflessness, caring, ambition and other qualities. If those are present, he said, “you can have them slip on as many banana peels as you want.”
Sorkin, who appeared on the panel with star Jeff Daniels and executive producer Alan Poul, said the show would continue to focus on real news stories that are 9 to 18 months old. The panel also revealed that this Sunday’s episode will deal with the night Osama Bin Laden is killed.


They need to fire Allison Pill. She’s borderline unwatchable. She’s shrill, annoying, and totally unconvincing in talking about the news and politics.
The show in general is fundamentally flawed. There’s no conflict, big or small, and without conflict, there’s no development or payoff. The characters all behave and speak the same way.
Let’s face it — The Newsroom is essentially dialogue porn for Sorkin.
No conflict? You’re not watching or a moron. Based on your opinion of Pill, I’d say moron is a safe bet.
About your last statement, it’s completely true, yes. But that’s probably the best reason to watch it.
She is borderline unwatchable but that might just be because the character is so revolting, not sure.
agreed!
Yes, they were NOT fired, but their “options” weren’t picked-up either… That said, I think the show could be better in season two.
I’m digging Newsroom. It’s fun, funny at times. Interesting. My only issue with it are the women. What’s up with the inept women looking to the men for advice, etc as in the last episode? And the intern, Allison Pill, being inept as well? Perhaps he needs more women writers, eh?
That is part of the problem, Pill’s character is not an intern, she’s an associate producer…
… who doesn’t know the difference between the US state of Georgia and the Republic of Georgia…
… who can’t conduct a phone prep with a guest without hurling personal insults at the guests representative
… who doesn’t know that LOL means “Laugh Out Loud”…
I enjoy the show, but know it could be better, I also feel kind of bad because it seems to revel in the men degrading the woman for being incompetent.
The Georgia and LOL gaffes were from when she first started working on the show, it only came up because they were doing, what was it, background checks or something?
That specific plot line was that “Maggie filed a complaint against Will via HR.” Oh, so Will screwed up — what did he do?, the characters wanted to know. But just like EVERY OTHER TIME Will is perceived to be a jacka$$, it turns out that no, he was well within his rights, but this other person (in this case, Maggie) totally had it coming. Because she made all kinds of dumb mistakes! Wow, well, thank god we made sure Will didn’t do anything wrong by making it clear that a female person is a completely screw-up while the men stand around doing them the favor of keeping calm and offering helpful advice, for approximately the 800th time since the opening moments of the pilot. See also: The gossip columnist who is a humorless shrew, see also MacKenzie sleeping around on Will, see also Will shouting at that college student who was so epically dumb that she NEEDED a good yelling-at.
The only exception thus far is this week’s scene in which Will hammers on a gay black professor and the professor goes off on him, rightfully so. But then, just so we know that Will Is Secretly Right to Press the Point, the segment ends with Will getting the professor to make a humiliating personal admission.
But but but, Will does have flaws! He is a sap! He’s such a romantic that he’s going to keep a $20,000 diamond ring in his desk, in case he can finally make it work with MacKenzie.
Wow, that IS a huge character flaw, especially considered to MacKenzie who accidentally emails 25,000 people an embarrassing message, Maggie who (we learn) once confused Georgia the state and Georgia the country and the Japenese-speaking economics Ph.D. who is suspended for doing something terrible (TERRIBLE!) that, near as I can tell, is exactly the thing we saw Will doing in the first four episodes.
Oh crap. I just rolled my eyes so hard they stuck that way.
Agreed. Of course, I found The West Wing unwatchable for many of the same sorts of reasons.
And uhh, Aaron…It’s not television; it’s HBO.
I am a huge Sorkin fan and there’s a lot about the Newsroom that I LOVE, but he’s absolutely blind if he doesn’t think the female characters on the show are problematic. You’ve got a ball-buster in Fonda, flibbertygibbets in Mac and Pill, and that’s about it.
And yet, the men…How noble! How steady and calm in a storm!
Always willing to ride in a rescue the flibbertygibbets from breakdowns, gossipmongers, and their own hyperemotional transgressions.
Puke much?
Unfortunately, adding women to the writing staff isn’t going to solve anything. Good luck trying to convince an emmy winning creator EP that he’s a wee bit sexist.
I just try to enjoy the show and try not to puke when the flibbertygibbets start flibberting.
Love this show. Love the writing and the situation. HBO can be praised to the skies for the shows they produce.
Its ironic that the things that are highlighted on the show seem to come true in real life. That kinda kills the argument that the show is fundamentally flawed, and, yes, it is dialogue porn … every good writing is dialogue porn.
Could be the funniest post on ALL of Deadline.
“It’s IRONIC that the things that are highlighted on the show seem to come true in real life.”
Ever think they come true because THEY ALREADY HAPPENED? The show, so far, is set in the past!
Think before you risk your on-line reputation by making anonymous posts!!
Good Lord Carnac, how did I miss that! Cause I didn’t, you genius.
What? “The things that are highlighted on the show seem to come true in real life”? Of course they did, it takes place 2 years ago! That’s my main issue with the show (besides the characters who aren’t actual believable characters so much as just automated word fountains)… the ridiculous 20/20 hindsight where The Newsroom team just so happens to be correct on almost every major news story. The better show would be about a news team that gets it wrong in the same way news at the time got stuff wrong. I don’t want to watch a show where people have an omnipotent ability to always know what the right way to cover a story is.
Automated Word Fountains! Love it!
This cannot be a real, sincere post. It just can’t.
Have you been watching the show under the assumption or belief that the news events they depict are themselves fictional?
Not just that, but are you also complimenting the writers on their almost supernatural prescience because these seemingly fictional events seem to unfold — or seem to have unfolded — in our own very real world?
I really, really can’t tell if you’re being facetious or if you really believe that Aaron Sorkin “made up” a story about the BP oil spill or Gabby Gifford getting shot in Arizona — and then they somehow “seem[ed] to [have] come true in real life.”
This can’t be a real, sincere response to my post. It just can’t! You really think that’s what I meant?
I think what AH meant was that the issues that are highlighted in the show seem to still be relevant in light of current news events. For instance, the episode that involves the Gabrielle Giffords shooting and the subsequent debate about gun control that ran the same week as the shooting in Aurora. Just sayin’
“All good writing is dialogue porn.”
ALL good writing is dialogue porn? Are you kidding me? Then why do so many wonderful writers disagree with you? William Goldman, for example (no slouch himself in the screenwriting department and reportedly one of Aaron Sorkin’s mentors), holds that dialogue is the one ingredient people who don’t know anything about screenwriting BELIEVE to be most essential to a screenplay’s success, but it’s not. Goldman maintains that wonderful dialogue is indispensable in only one genre: Comedy. As for the rest, he says, the most important ingredient is STRUCTURE.
I don’t know why so many writers disagree with me CL. I have the right to my opinion and they to theirs. While structure is important, I maintain that if its stuffed with hokey dialogue then its useless.
Appreciate the exhaustive response to my post guys. Clearly, you are only looking at things in the most superficial way. When I said “the things that are highlighted on the show seem to come true in real life,” I did not mean the incidents (Giffords shooting or the Louisiana oil spill) but notions such as news stations using one unconfirmed report to create stories, etc. These aren’t incident specific but things that occur all the time e.g. the recent stories about Newsroom firing its entire writing staff. I understand you aren’t all analysts but you couldn’t have actually thought I meant the writing staff was “prescient,” could you? I mean, that’s just retarded!
Dialogue porn… perfectly put! It’s like watching verbal tennis. People don’t interact that way. We don’t know everything that comes out of our mouths before we say it and that’s how this show feels. Too smart for its own good. I’m done watching.
Give it a chance. It’s the same kind of dialogue that MASH had. Remember ping pong conversation.
He treats his writers like glorified researchers. Never lets them write a script or even a few lines of dialogue. Then when the reviews are awful (or mostly awful) he lets his entire staff go under he guise of doing what’s best for the show, letting them take the fall for his inability to delegate. He’s a fucking coward.
Sorkin is a blatantly lying. I know a writer on staff who was fired from the show. And Corinne IS his ex girlfriend. She’s also very intelligent and funny so I’m not suggesting she shouldn’t be on staff (I’d hire her), but it’s very strange that Sorkin has taken to outright lying about this staff. Why?
Also, the show is beyond awful. Most people I know watch it just to call their friends and discuss how anything could be so horrible.
He had a good staff of writers. Smart, dedicated, interested in working on a great show. And he rewards that by not picking up their options which is the same fucking thing as being fired. Tool!
And when the show is exactly the same in Season #2 as it was in Season #1 bc Aaron learned nothing because he never learns anything—who will he blame?
As a WABC Senior Executive Producer for 18 years, Managing Editor at WCBS for 2 years and Assignment Manager for Post Newsweek, I have a serious problem with the way THE NEWSROOM represents women. If it does not improve, my entire family, including more journalists, male and female, we’ll stop watching. Women make outstanding journalists who multi-task in ways male counterparts could never compete. Love Sam Waterson! And, Mac needs to have a mental breakdown after her 3 years covering the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Then, her mindless character will make sense. Please, figure it out. Women WILL stop watching!
I’m a male viewer, and I totally agree on all points.
Mac, the exec producer, has to count using her fingers, and has virtually zero knowledge of or expertise in anything economics.
Sloan, the dual PhD — and even though recruited by Mac — exists both on the fictional news show AND The Newsroom merely because she’s an attractive female; she’s also made to look like a dependent woman who cannot make decisions for herself.
Allison Pill confuses the country, Georgia, with the state, Georgia despite “Georgia” being mentioned in an international affairs context.
Will’s date, the NY senator, was made out to be a bumbling bimbo who is no less shallow or idiotic than the “Housewives” she’s infatuated with.
Even one of the first females on screen in the series — the blonde college soph — was portrayed to be a ditzy sorority girl who didn’t know the difference between “one” and “more than one.”
The women seem to only serve as props and prop-ups for the men.
I’m a fan of the show, but completely agree with this sentiment. I’m surprised Mac isn’t more comparable to Allison Janey’s character on The West Wing.
Also the Georgia joke was a bit much, considering it was a running gag on Yahoo Answers during he actual invasion..
Perfectly put, @Elaine, @Bees, @No One Of Consequence and @yes.
Allison Pill’s character is the most obnoxious, IMO. Obviously Sorkin finds this character’s unprofessionalism, borderline hysteria and all-around bumbling to be adorable, when it is actually nauseating.
So, you’re giving them this one…last…chance.
Are you sure you really mean this time, or will there be another warning from you and your family?
If that is all it is, then fine by me. Best thing on TV now.
Uh….Breaking Bad?
I love The Newsroom. It’s smart, witty and the characters are engaging. My only “complaint” ~~ give more air time to Sam Waterston and bring back Jane Fonda!!
For Godssake. Can’t anyone say it. The writing is awful. And don’t listen to other writers in the biz who are too afraid to say he sucks. Nobody speaks that way. Nobody waits for the other guys line to end. This is inwatchable. Either the acting is terrible or the writing. Because its all fake. Look to Paul Schrader for a real
Writer.
What a pathetic, sad little creature you are.
Really, nobody speaks that way? Shakespeare’s characters spoke in iambic pentameter and nobody real spoke that way either. It is called stylization. The idea so many people have that ALL fiction has to be naturalistic speaks to a serious failure in how people are educated in America.
“Nobody talks that way” is industry speak for “I don’t like it but I have no idea why.”
That comment was written for the 27 year old secretary working a desk.
The writing is bad. The speeches each character makes while the other listens. Bad dialog. What they say sounds bad. Facts listed. Pause. Try to be cute. Pause. Facts listed. Read the New Yorker review. Smart. The writing of Newsroom is terrible. And Facebook was terrible. Look at real movies. Not glorified Soaps. I say Affliction or Taxi Driver because these are stories that take you in. Not Soap Operas. This show is embarrassing. It will be done after season two.
well, sorry to break this to you but no one says “inwatchable”. its “unwatchable”
I wish HBO would pair this with one of their hit shows. There’s just no reason to keep HBO during the early Summer.
They do. It’s paired with True Blood.
True Blood is awful. I prefer my porn with less dialogue.
LOL. True Blood is HBO’s most popular show.
Great dialogue stems from great characters and, sadly, the Newsroom’s characters are mostly walking position papers. The show is stillborn. I admire Sorkin a great deal, but he’s missed on this just like he missed on Studio 60. The Social Network and Moneyball were terrific. Maybe Sorkin should focus on screenwriting and directing. TV appears to have passed him by.
Deadline, he fired all but three writers on the show. One of the writers, David Handelman, has written about it on his own weblog. If that’s not cleaning house, I don’t know what is.
Aaron Sorkin has told so many LIES here that I don’t know where to start. These are the FACTS:
1. Aaron totally fired his entire writing staff. Six in total.
2. Corrine Kingsbury did NOT get fired and is totally his ex-girlfriend!!
3. Writers are coming into work very early? Huh? The writing staff is on hiatus!
Writers on a Sorkin show don’t even write scripts anyway, therefore this is clearly a way to scapegoat the writers in reaction to the critics who don’t like the show.
This is shameful, Mr. Sorkin.
He just got rid of Gideon Yago. Relax.
It was just a misunderstanding… its not that Sorkin fired his writing staff. Its that he SHOULD fire his writing staff. Anyway, I agree with you that Sorkin’s writing style grows tiresome very quickly. He’s like a flashy guitarist who can’t come up with a good song. The show would benefit from a bit less yapping and more action.
So you are saying he’s The Edge of U2?
i guess i was thinking Eddie Van Halen but that’s a whole different conversation.
It’s basically the effect of being totally impressed for a few minutes and then it devolves into boredom, headaches, nausea, feelings of despair…
Heard he got rid of Gideon Yago. Good, because, an MTV anchor does not a writer make. Would bet the farm that the kid has zero talent, certainly not the talent to write for Sorkin.
Gideon Yago is a Peabody and Emmy-award winning journalist. For newscasts he wrote. And you’ve done…?
Maybe go back to that farm you’re betting.
Hm. Gideon was the only season one writer Aaron saw fit to share a script credit with, for “The Apology.” So your rant is not only juvenile snark, it’s fact-checkably incorrect.
Sorry, I misremembered the episode title — “The 112th Congress” which contained Will’s apology.
Clearly you only watch mtv because gideon yago has done a lot with his career since his mtv days. try reading the news sometime.
Aaron has written some great things in the past. he also has had some great misses. Unfortunately, for me, he missed on this one. There is no sense of reality. Jeff is a one note character who is increasingly annoying. The women are either rootless or simpletons. This newroom couldn’t survive in the real world, with people acting like pompous or bombastic know it all’s.
…….And for a Republican, he’s the most liberal person one could ever know. He’s just not believable.
And of course, the general over acting…………….
Someone needs to take a camera and follow sorkin around for a really great showw.xo
If you read the news often and appreciate truth then you will admire this show.
They take the time to expose the flaws in big media and how and why we get the information we do.
Coupled with the Koch Brothers exposition this show is riskier than anything in cinema or television.
I read the news, and appreciate truth, and I do not admire the show.
The flaws the show “exposes” have been exposed for many years already. They have been spoken of, and examined, with much greater insight elsewhere. Just not on a fictional television show.
The show is hardly riskier than anything in cinema and television. Michael Moore was riskier in “Roger and Me” years ago, and continues to be with everything he does. Oh, and he works with news and truth.
Aaron Sorkin is wildly skilled, but the facility with which he writes can often shortchange the attention, and rigor, devoted to story and character. He has done wondrous work, yet some of his projects are troublingly similar to each other, and can therefor suffer from identical shortcomings.
And, since this was an article about whether or not he has fired a number of staff, not about the quality of the show, it gets tiring reading his blatant lies to the press. The writers’ guild chastised him for it years ago in regard to sharing credit for EMMY winning scripts, and now he seems to be at it again. That habit, and this show, makes me yawn.
Wow. Did I just read that Michael Moore works with news and truth? Am I missing the sarcasm here? How did I stumble onto this left wing crap? Oh wait because it’s about entertainment. And this is where the left hide behind to create their propaganda. Must leave now.
Too bad horses werent dying during the filming of this – then HBO would have a good excuse to cancel it.
Comment of the day!!
True Blood is awful. Couldn’t get past episode 2 season one. Next!