Wow did Firefly fans misinterpret my intent (Normally I’d say “maybe I was unclear.” But having re-read the post, I don’t think I was that unclear). Here’s a typical email:

Jonah, Love your commentary usually, but I have a bit of a complaint about your bringing Firefly into the discussion. Firefly had almost the exact opposite problem as Studio 60, so shouldn’t be lumped into the same category. Everyone I know who has seen Firefly has loved it — going beyond the usual sci-fi lines. The problem was Fox didn’t give it a chance. They didn’t support the show, didn’t give it a fair run, and sad to say got caught up in the frenzy of reality television so dumped the show. Firefly wasn’t “too good” for America, it was America, perfectly suited for a broad range. It was not perfect for those sorts of people who do programming and who like Studio 60. Studio 60 will be given too much of a chance because, like Shakespeare in Love, it is a show about people who have the power to push shows. It will last far longer than it should. Firefly was on the surface confusing, but anyone I know who actually sat down for an episode realized the complexity was only as deep as the description — those were real people there on the Serenity, who we all could identify with.

Me: Let me just be clear. I wasn’t comparing Studio 60 (haughty drek) to Firefly (maximum TV goodness). I was saying that some liberals would make the comparison or that they would talk about it the same way sci-fi geeks (like me, dagnabbit) talk about Firefly. I don’t for a minute think Firefly is anything remotely like Studio Sixty. I loved Firefly. Loved, loved, loved.