Why do you think shows today take longer to develop an audience, and seem to have a harder time catching on?
I really don’t know. I can give an opinion. A friend of mine once said, “The longer you’re on television, the longer you’re on television.” As a viewer, even I sit there and go, “I heard this one’s not going to last. I hear they’re thinking about canceling it, so I won’t invest my time.” Everything is so fast. I think that when a show comes back for a second year, if you haven’t already become its audience... you tend to be more willing to invest your time as an audience member.

So, with things being so speedy and fast with the ability of doing a reality show and not having to pay huge sums of money to do it, I imagine the temptation -- if you’re kind of a bottom-line-dollar exec -- is to go with the least expensive, fastest results. I think things go in cycles. It wasn’t until we came in behind Cosby that Cheers really took off. It took us three years. If networks allowed shows to nurture, there’s a better chance that they will develop the big hits. Seinfeld was the same way. It was not a big hit [at first].

Which sitcoms have you enjoyed watching in recent years?
Friends — you know, each one of those people was just so much fun to watch. That was a great show. [Everybody Loves] Raymond, that was a great deal of fun. I enjoyed doing Becker. Right now, I’m really enjoying [My Name Is] Earl. [Ugly] Betty looks like it’s really fun. You know, that’s interesting. I wonder whether half-hours are going to start to go into hours. Because, when you try and tell a half-hour story, you really have, on the networks, 21 minutes to do it. With one-camera comedies, I wonder whether they’re going to start moving into an hour format.