Turn-on (1969– ) User Reviews

There it is...oops we missed it.

[haildevilman · 5/10 · 28 January 2008]

I (believe it or don't) saw blips of this on a Japanese sampler of "Comedy Shows From Around The World." I don't know where they got the clips from however.

Setting a record for the fastest cancellation is this show's only mention in most cases. It's "Laugh-In" with the raunchy humor turned up a few notches. Teresa Graves is even in it.

The rapid (and I do mean RAPID) fire humor looked like Monty Python on crystal meth. Too fast for most. And the double-entendres put off sponsors and censors. Big surprise there. The music was the WORST thing about this. That probably single-handedly prevented anyone from even caring if this got nixed.

That said, the networks made a mistake by not trying to give it another chance. It probably could have been great. But the producers goofed and the censors were too tight.

My personal fave joke? Sexy girl in front of a firing squad. "Miss, instead of you getting a last request, we would like to make a last request." Wink-wink.

Anyone got this on video? Drop me a line if you do.

And at the same time Monty Python was also revolutionising comedy...

[zh84 · 4/10 · 12 July 2023]

This came out the year before I was born, so obviously I am working from an ancient copy of the show long before my time. Monty Python's Flying Circus also came out in 1969, and casts a long shadow to this day. Meanwhile on the other side of the Atlantic a completely different team was also trying something completely different, with less success.

This show is notorious for having been cancelled after one episode was transmitted - indeed, that's how I came to learn of it. I don't think it's that bad, but then fifty years later I can't really imagine how 30 minutes almost entirely devoted to sex jokes would have been seen, even in the Swinging Sixties. Some of the gags fell flat, but some were at least amusing. The worst thing about it was the constant noodling on a Moog synthesiser, which was very "up to date" at the time but just acted as a distraction. What would have come next we will never know. Apparently another episode was filmed, and the Wikipedia quotes Maura McGiveny as saying five shows were filmed and twenty-one planned. If they were going to stick to sex jokes for twenty-one half-hour shows, the joke would certainly have worn thin long before they stopped. I hope they had some other ideas for episode 2. Nonetheless, if I could find it, I'd at least give it a try.

has to be seen to be believed

[apsand · 4 January 2005]

The Museum of Television and Radio actually have two episodes of Turn On (though one is slightly misfiled). This show is one of the most surreal pieces of television I have ever witnessed. Shot entirely on a white sound stage with no sets and no laugh track, the gags are faster than rapid fire and rather cutting edge for the time. The credits (which feature many names not listed here, including Albert Brooks) run for the entire duration of both programs! Other episodes shot for this program (but never aired) included guest shots from Sebastian Cabot and the Monkees. Robert Culp is the special guest on episode two. All I can tell you is that most descriptions of this program in books or on the internet are from people who have never actually seen this thing - it isn't so much a Laugh In rip off, as it is what might happen if the Fox network tried to spice up the Laugh In concept. With skits about foot fetishes and birth control it may still be a little much for the meek. I recommend it to any '60s pop culture fanatic (though the first episode will give you a headache from the incessant Moog synthesizer music, which is played non-stop).

Tune In, Turn On, Look Out

[genekim · 1/10 · 25 August 2010]

The show opens in a huge white void, with some kind of computer console sitting in the middle of said void. A pair of technicians, their backs always to the camera, walk in and sit down at the console. One of them says, "Well, Charlie, this is it: The first computerized TV show." Charlie says, "I never programmed a program before. What's first?" Technician #1 replies, "This week's guest star: Tim Conway." "Groovy," says Charlie. "Turn on!" Someone presses a button, whereupon Tim Conway magically appears just long enough to announce, "Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to 'Peyton Re-place!'" before vanishing. Considering what's to come, Conway may have wanted to take a powder for the remainder of the show.

And with that, we're off and stumbling with the only episode of "Turn-On" to air on ABC, a show that lives on in legend as one of the worst things ever to grace (or disgrace) network television - a program deemed so bad, ABC canceled the rest of its run while this half-hour premiere was still in progress. (Tim Conway has claimed that an ABC affiliate in his home state of Ohio actually pulled the show off the air midway through.)

I'd missed out on "Turn-On's" first - and last - showing on Feb. 5, 1969. But thanks to the Paley Center for Media in midtown Manhattan, I was able to watch the program that inspired a May 17, 1969 TV Guide article, "The Show That Died After One Night" as well as a chapter in the book, "The Worst TV Shows Ever." More than 40 years and 29 mirthless minutes later, I agree: This was one awful show.

"Turn-On" was created by executive producers George Schlatter and Ed Friendly, the creators of "Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In." Comparisons are inevitable, since both shows go in for the same kind of "hip" 60s humor. But it's obvious that "Turn-On" tried hard to be different. Instead of "Laugh-In's" psychedelic swirls and fully-dressed sets, "Turn-On" embraced a minimal look with its mostly white backgrounds and rudimentary decorations. Instead of videotape, "Turn-On" was shot on film. And instead of canned or real laughter, there's no laughter at all (and, for that matter, no laughs). In keeping with the premise that the show is being churned out by a computer, there are "computer sounds" that keep beeping away throughout the half-hour; sometimes they burst into a yadda-yadda-yadda transition melody.

Maybe Schlatter, Friendly & Co. Thought they were pioneering a new, postmodern show offering pure, distilled comedy, but the result is a visually empty, sterile-looking program that viewers probably found disquieting, if not disturbing, to watch. And what with some of the unfunniest material this side of Beautiful Downtown Burbank that the vaguely recognizable cast is given by a team of nine credited writers, the show didn't stand a chance.

Some examples:

A bikini-wearing Teresa Graves lounges on a bench surrounded by cardboard bushes. She exclaims, "I feel so guilty - I mean, lying here and all." Pause. "I should be out *shopping* somewhere!"

An armed hijacker tells an ersatz Superman: "OK buddy, take me to Cuba."

Chuck McCann, dressed as a cop, prowls around cardboard bushes with his flashlight while singing, "Hello, young lovers, wherever you are ..."

Blonde chick: "Do you love me?" Tim Conway: "Do I love you??? We just met a couple of minutes ago. For all I know, you might be a pot-smoking, jaded, wild-eyed, radical dropout." Blonde chick: "I *am* a pot-smoking, jaded, wild-eyed, radical dropout." Conway: "I love you."

Tim Conway, being booked in a police station on a variety of charges, demands to use the phone. He then orders a bucket of chicken (not a ham sandwich, as TV Guide would have it).

Sometimes things get downright embarrassing for the performers. The extremely attractive Maura McGiveney, decked out in a tastefully low-cut evening gown and half-reclining on a chaise, is repeatedly introduced with the words, "Ladies and gentlemen, the Body Politic." As the "Body Politic," a deadpan McGiveney gets to deliver such lines as, "Mr. Nixon, as president, now becomes the *titular* head of the Republican Party," and, "We *must* reorder our nation's priorities to resolve the *cleavages* that separate us."

Some of the jokes do attempt to be pointed and topical. There are two references to the then-raging Vietnam War. In one bit, we see a set of black tables arranged in the shape of a swastika. A voice declares, "You are now looking at the table at the Paris peace talks agreed to by General Ky," a slam at South Vietnam's Hitler-admiring vice president. In another scene, two cast members are perusing a large globe. One says to the other, "Tell me, where is the capital of South Vietnam?" The other cast member (Hamilton Camp, I do believe) moves the globe toward Europe and replies, "Mostly over here, in Swiss bank accounts."

Some viewers were apparently shocked and appalled by what they were seeing. People may have thought "Turn-On" was unfunny because it was in bad taste. I think the reverse is true - it was in bad taste because it wasn't funny. If a show is genuinely entertaining, viewers, then and now, can be very forgiving. If not ...

Footnote: The copy of "Turn-On" at the Paley Center included commercials. One was for Ban deodorant spray. In it, an actor and actress playing a Northern gentleman and a Southern belle stand against a mostly empty white background. Northern gentleman: "Melanie, I forgot to use New Dry Ban antiperspirant on my trip down South." Southern belle: "Oh! A damp Yankee!" How about that? A commercial that not only looked and sounded just like the show it was on - it was just as chillingly unfunny.

The other rumor

[rhwells · 1/10 · 30 October 2007]

I watched this show for about 5 minutes (I was 15) and joined millions in turning it off. (Funny, I did the same thing to "Caveman" this year.)

The rumor I heard was that the head of ABC actually canceled the show BEFORE the first episode ended. (At 13 minutes into the show, supposedly the head of ABC told someone this was the ONLY episode ever to appear on the network.) That would have to be a record for anyone.

Although, if ABC had any taste they would've done the same for "Caveman."

Alas, poor Tim Conway had found a way to get onto yet another falling rock!

Unique doesn't always mean good

[finercreative · 1/10 · 17 February 2024]

I can understand why this was yanked off the air before the first episode even finished. First off, sure it was unique for the time, and used many different techniques in its filming, animation, and comedy. The problem though is that just because it's unique, that doesn't mean it's good.

It's not funny. Like, not at all. I seriously couldn't even find a punchline in some of the skits. I don't know if the creators were trying to be funny, or trying to make the viewer uncomfortable, and it seems to be doing both, but much more successfully in the latter.

Other than that, the acting and soundtrack don't help the show at all. Maybe if you are stoned out of your mind this would be a cool experience. 1.5/10.

categorically: the worst one-shot fired

[gentk · 1/10 · 16 March 2007]

1969, i was a young man of 16 years of age. to claim then, that Turn-On was the worst thing i had seen in my life may not have said as much. So, now, at a suave and silver 53, having seen and experienced such much more, what i'll say has more bearing. all I remember is the show was so fast it was over, and I mean over. It was all we howled about in school the next day. i cannot recall one line from it and aside from the comments listed here, some don't trigger any thoughts. i really wanted to know if IMDb had it listed. well, I found it. thanks, what I do remember was it was'not Laugh-In like, which was the attempt here. thanks again for the listing, of which i'll share with my brother.

"ABC's 'Turn-On', featuring A Cast Of Dozens... Hundreds Of Dollars Spent in Production...

[edrybaaudio · 7/10 · 16 October 2020]

THAT was really a line used in a promo for this "Series That Wasn't'. I lived in the Los Angeles area at the time, and since KABC-TV was and is owned and operated by the ABC Television Network, the entire excruciating half-hour WAS aired on Channel 7 (KABC-TV), since the station's parent company, was ABC, back when "ABC" stood for the "American Broadcasting Company" (which is now owned by the Walt Disney Company, Inc... so now the letters "ABC" don't really stand for ANYTHING... exactly the way "CBS" no longer stands for "the COLUMBIA BROADCASTING SYSTEM", and the name of that company now is just "CBS, Inc". The rumors are true - "TURN-ON" actually WAS canceled in the middle of the first episode... on the West Coast, anyway. ABC had paid for it, and they already knew how well it had done on the East Coast and Midwest (and that, friends is why you see airtimes listed as "9:00 PM Eastern, 8:00 PM Central"), but they gave it one last chance before they pulled the plug. Good idea, but nobody actually understood the things the Executive Producer, George Schlatter (of "Laugh-In" fame) was trying to describe to the people who actually made this thing. It's been said that "Nobody starts out to make a bad show", and I'm sure that's true here... but the viewers didn't move as fast as this show did. It wasn't until the days of MTV being brand-new in the 1980's that the TV audience had caught up with the speed at which "Turn-On" zoomed by. It was just too unfunny and too fast to make much of an impression on the TV Audience.

A bit colorful for it's time

[wlmlbl · 3/10 · 16 February 2008]

I remember watching the only episode of this show that ever aired. I do remember Tim Conway using a lot of vulgarity, which I never noticed in any other work that he did. The skits seemed to mimic that of Rowen and Martin's Laugh-In. I know that this show was so controversial at the time that it was canceled 10 minutes after it was aired. The other networks wouldn't even touch it.

Because of the time difference, people on the west coast never got to see it. I remember commenting to my mom how out of place the show was. There were some scenes that were drawn, and the characters just "popped in". This show was below the kind of comedy that Tim Conway was capable of doing.

About Tim Conway...

[edrybaaudio · 7/10 · 16 October 2020]

HE got the "10" rating, not this show!

Anyway, in the early 1970's, the Technicians' Union at CBS (in case you're keeping score), The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, or IBEW, went on strike against CBS in the early 1970's. Being as close to "TELEVISION CITY IN HOLLYWOOD" as I was, during that strike I drove up to TV City every afternoon during the strike. Why would I do such a thing? Because all of the original CBS Technicians who had yet to retire STILL WORKED THERE! The upshot of this was that all the Senior technicians had a million GREAT stories about the early days of TV! When Channel 2 (then known as KNXT), first started on the air from "Columbia Square" on Sunset Boulevard in Hollyweird, the original home of KNX Radio and CBS RADIO NETWORK WEST COAST OPERATIONS, I was told that they'd have a studio all set up for a show that was done in front of a live audience (such as "The Arthur Godfrey Show" or "Art Linkletter's House Party), and as soon as that show was over (on the Radio Network), they would strike the radio equipment and immediately set up for a CBS TV Network show IN THE SAME STUDIO! They got to be so good at this, they could easily have the TV setup ready to go in less than one hour after the Radio show had finished! Back to Tim Conway though, while walking the picket line with the CBS techs at TV City, I saw Tim Conway drive into the parking lot off Fairfax Avenue. He was doing The Carol Burnet Show at the time, and was driving a fancy new Mercedes-Benz convertible. The top was down, so I could easily see him, and then I saw his license plate. In those days, a TV Network would order 13 weeks worth of shows. If the show did well in the ratings, the Network would order more. I don't know how familiar you are with Conway's career, but until Carol Burnet, Conway just could not do a series which had his name on it that lasted more than 13 weeks. So when I saw Tim Conway drive into Television City, I noticed his custom California license plate. It read, "13 WKS". Think about it.

You know it's bad when...

[pmike-11312 · 1/10 · 11 August 2023]

...it gets cancelled after 1 (partially shown) episode. Heck, My Mother The Car lasted an entire season, for cryin' out loud! I vaguely remember watching this because Tim Conway (Esn. Parker) was on it and it was supposed to be better than Laugh-In. Hoo boy! Lame, stupid, unfunny, and boring, this was no Laugh-In. Some say it was ahead of its time, but I think in reality, it was just plain BAD. As noted, some stations bailed-out after half the show had aired, and many on the Left...er, West coast got wind of it and never aired it at all. Another episode was apparently taped but never shown. They should've burned both tapes.

Dreadful Rip-off of "Laugh-In"

[Howie0331 · 28 April 2004]

Yes, this one definately aired on ABC...I remember watching that one episode broadcasting out of New York in 1969. I was only ten years old at the time, so I wouldn't have understood much, if any, of the sexual innuendo. Although I wasn't completely green, having managed to view part of Jane Fonda's Barbarella a few months earlier, after the kiddie classic The Christmas that Almost Wasn't.

From all the commercial hype leading up to the show I was expecting--no, hoping for--another "Laugh-In," which was the most talked-about series on TV during the 1968-69 season and Goldie Hawn the most talked-about new star. "Laugh-In" was my favorite show at that time, and figured two of the same was better than one.

Which was what nobody got. I remember this being one of the most lame excuses for a prime-time show I had ever seen. My older sisters and I weren't horrified by the content so much as bored and disappointed.

When it didn't come back the following week, I was surprised yet not surprised. I never saw a show disappear that quickly, no matter how bad. And yet I wouldn't mind seeing this again...if only to re-confirm what I thought then.

Literally disconcerting

[tynicholson-93611 · 2/10 · 6 September 2023]

Being able to watch the two episodes, the show definitely lives up to the anti-hype.

On the positive side, the diversity of the show is modern. Bonnie Boland seemed to be the most talented, Mel Stewart and Chuck McCann show some chops, Teresa Graves seems underutilized, and the guest stars (Tim Conway, Robert Culp, France Nuyen) play ball pretty well.

Like Laugh In, to the modern ear the jokes alternate between cornball and mildly funny. What they would have called the "blue" humour isn't much to the modern sensibility, aside from a latent creepiness that can pop up. Some of the formatting, like the four pane trick, is creative and could have probably had a future.

The problem is, instead of the bright colours, interesting music, and general upbeat mood, it's just rapid fire sketches, noises, and visuals in a sterile white room. This isn't accounting for the era, even in the TikTok age, the sketches come very quickly, to the viewer in 1969 it must have been a shock.

The random nature of the skits is part of the format and probably leads to killing it, as it makes any set-ups seem really laboured ("you get one phone call..."). The longer sketches ("E. Eddy Edwards", the "sex"/faces montage) also are unfortunately the complete duds of the package.

The ugly part is the synthezier, which aside from a riff that sounds like an NES theme from the 80s, just becomes a complete mess of noises and bad pacing.

The pace, the white light, and the constant weird "churning" noises go from annoying to literally disconcerting after about 5-10 minutes. Purely subjectively, my stomach started feeling uneasy in the second half of the second episode, there might be a weird harmonics issue.

It's interesting to watch and imagine what a family watching this in the era of 3 channels would have thought. Sadly, nothing else of note.

I, too, remember this show from my youth

[hung_fao_tweeze · 30 July 2004]

I didn't think it was funny either. It seemed very sterile and maybe a bit too fast-paced. The only bit I really recall is a ballet dancer spinning about and colliding with other dancers - which was almost funny. I believe another bit had the dancer falling into bed. It was a long time ago and the show was mostly forgettable. I don't remember it being 'dirty'. Maybe it was but it went over my head. Tim Conway was way out of place here. A complete waste. I, too, would like to see it again to make a more current judgment. It was probably conveyed to the audience improperly. The biggest problem may have been that there wasn't much banter ala Dan Rowan/Dick Martin. The show practically alienated from the outset.

Ayayay!

[bennyp81 · 31 March 2005]

I learned about this show a few days ago. Having read some of the amusing comments regarding this show on IMDb, I just had to go down to the Museum of Television & Radio in Beverly Hills to see what the fuss was about.

Oh wow. The trivia section here said that ABC canceled the show just minutes after the first episode began airing. Now that I saw that fateful first episode, they were doing 60s television a favor. Manic, disturbing, unnerving and psychotic are just some of the lighter adjectives that describe this show. By itself, the "rapid fire humor" was too rapid (the show cuts into too many skits into too little time) and not humorous enough (obvious double jokes, for one).

And yet the show was funny... for all the wrong reasons! While the jokes were hardly laughable (except perhaps the candy dispenser refusing to pop out The Pill; that was a real guff!), their execution certainly was. Mr. Conway tries, but he really doesn't belong here; "eye-candy" that isn't; a curious dog-cat-Muppet hybrid silently popping up with a bewildering stare after seeing a, um, "sex act"; oh, and let's not forget the "Body Politic". All of this is sardine-canned into thirty minutes to yield some of the most bizarre entertainment ever produced for television. Perhaps it should come with every sale of the Ludovico Machine. Indeed, the white background, extremely minimalist set designs and mind-frying Moog synthesizer music would make you think that Laugh-In was doing a little "in-out in-out" with Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange!

At least it gave Tim Conway a punch line

[davidemartin · 8 June 2004]

When Tim was doing chat shows in the 70s, the discussion would always include a comment like, "You've been on a lot of TV series." Tim would then respond by listing every show he was on, and then the number of episodes before it was cancelled. And then he would say, "Turn-On. Cancelled after one show."

Legend has it the head of ABC programming actually decided to cancel it the moment it ended. At the time, ABC was still the distant third-place network. The hope was that George Schlatter could give ABC a counterpart to NBC's LAUGH-IN and CBS' SMOTHERS BROTHERS. Too bad the material was just not there. I was 12 when I watched this. None of my family was interested on it, so I watched it in my bedroom. I remember thinking it was odd. I don't recall laughing much at it.

One dismal television experience.

[theowinthrop · 31 October 2005]

If LAUGH-IN, today, dates very badly (how many of us find jokes about figures from the LBJ and Nixon period funny today?), TURN-ON lacks the variety of the comic skits that makes parts of LAUGH-IN funny even now. It was only 30 minutes long, and it's running connection was briefly shot scenes of two or three men in a booth running the projector and special effects. It wasted some talented people, including two favorites of mine, Hamilton Camp and Chuck McCann. In fact, the "best" memory I have of this terrible show was of McCann, as a cop on the beat at a lover's lane in the country, looking through car windows with a flashlight, singing, "Hello Young Lovers" as he did so. That was the show's best moment.

All I remember was....

[illgetby · 25 August 2004]

..a woman going to a Candy/Cigarette looking machine, putting in some money, and when the thing she was waiting for didn't come out, she started kicking, punching, and shaking the machine. Then they zoomed in on the machine, and a sign on it said "The Pill", and then the "Please stand by" sign came on. The whole family started to think it was another report on Vietnam interrupting the show, or maybe some other new on shooting at a college or something like that, but it was just the show had been canceled. I'm not sure what they put on for the rest of the hour, all I know is they TURNED OFF "Turn On" minutes after it started. It had to be the most short lived program I've ever seen.

Different, creative...and annoying

[thenullcorporation · 18 February 2006]

I was a teenager in the Los Angeles area when it aired in its entirety.

It was heavily promoted (hyped) and being rebellious I had to watch. My parents were not upset but more stunned. As in, "What the...." A blend of topical humor of Laugh-In infused with the DNA of Ernie Kovacs led to a bad reaction -- the grafting did not take and resulted in chaos and convulsions. And not convulsions of laughter. It was not offensive, just alien. I was irritated by the continuous drumming or scatting or some annoying audio underlay that was more annoying that a continuous laugh track.

Creative is was. Entertaining it was not...unless you find train wrecks entertaining. Glad it was archived. Oddly, one of the few details I recall was that Sebastian Cabot was going to be the guest host the next week. I pondered if he knew what he was getting himself into.

Turned on, but did not stay on.

[TomReed · 2 May 1999]

The producers of "Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In" tried to outdo themselves with this ABC show, which had rapid-fire visual effects (sometimes lasting seconds). It was supposedly comedy produced by a computer monitored by two technicians. (In those days before effective videotape editing, it was produced on film to support those rapid cuts.)

The show got many complaints for its "dirtiness", which to my memory consisted of guest star Tim Conway saying something about "damn kids" and a one-minute silent bit with Conway's and a cast member's disembodied heads bobbing around on a black screen, with big glowing neon letters spelling "SEX." The show was cancelled the next morning by ABC, which I believe is still the record holder for a TV show cancellation.

I saw it all... for what it's worth...

[lbliss314 · 8 May 2005]

The ABC affiliate in my city aired the show in its entirety, so it was not canceled in mid-show. It was fast and unfunny. Part of the gimmick was that the show was put together by a computer, which leads to one guy saying "it's the first time I've ever programmed a program". Don't bust a gut laughing, folks. One thing that got it canned was showing the word "sex" for several minutes while the cast made lame jokes. Despite it being in the Sixties, a lot of folks objected to that three-letter word. ABC replaced it with "The King Family", a group of Lawrence Welk wannabes who exuded the kind of bland wholesomeness that made people hungry for Laugh-In.

Lastest reference to this TV show

[etherdog · 26 November 2005]

On the NPR radio program "Says You", this show was singled out as the worst turkey of a TV show ever. It was so bad that some TV stations pulled it at the first commercial break. The "Laugh-in" creators behind this show did not, apparently, have the creative talent behind them to make this show a success.

This is all I have to say about this show, but I am required to make the entry consist of at least ten lines of text. I do not think this is a rational requirement, because, as in this instance, the reference to the show being a turkey and being cited for same in a popular reference is worth noting in and of itself.

American Audiences Just Weren't Ready for This

[mrb1980 · 7 June 2008]

"Turn-On", an obvious knock-off of "Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In", has become almost legendary over the years, since it was canceled the day after its premiere. The entire show consisted of comedy skits shot against a featureless white background with no sets, and while it was certainly different, 1969 audiences just couldn't handle the risqué material.

I saw the entire show at age 12, so most of the humor went right over my head. I was struck by its rapid-fire pace, which made "Laugh-In" look plodding by comparison. In retrospect, I don't consider the show to be particularly bad, I just think viewers just weren't prepared for it. If it had premiered in 1979, who knows?

I heard my local station KOMO in Seattle requested a preview of Turn On First.

[GAPETERS9 · 4 May 2005]

I lived in Seattle at the time "Turn On" had its first and only showing. Back then a station could request a preview be sent on the network by land line for viewing. These came during late afternoon when ABC would not be feeding programs to the local City. Feeds to Seattle would come from KABC in Los Angeles. When KOMO looked at the preview they said they would not show it. Instead they would showed the local show "Viewpoint" instead at its new time. This talked about local issues. The next day I read in my local paper the "Seattle Times" that it had been canceled and ABC had a movie the next week hoping that local stations that had signed contracts for a replacement show that was not going to carry "Turn On" would carry the replacement. I never heard that it was canceled after 10 to 12 minutes and some viewers said with a "Please Stand by" or "Technical Difficulties". Back then networks would feed by land line out of New York to all times zone except the Pacific for the first feed and three hours later another feed would come out of LA for the Pacific time zone. Some stations in the Mountain time zone might record the feed for later showing that night. It was broadcast on Wednesday night at 8:30 PM EST/PST. If stations in the Mountain time zone thought 6:30 was too early for the adult program might hold it for 9:00 or 9:30 PM when children would more likely be in bed. Perhpaps it was the Pacific time zone feed that got it canceled after 10 minutes because many complaints would have been phoned in to the network in New York earlier and more might have come into LA later. Long distance was more expensive back then for long distances but if you were only 25 miles away it might be local or at most 25 cents for three minutes. In Alaska and Hawaii everything was a week or two later.

An idea whose time still has not come

[Ware · 26 May 2003]

All hell broke loose after this heavily hyped show ran on ABC.

In the first place, it wasn't funny. Lots of sexual innuendo was a problem but in those days sexual innuendo was a staple on the Smothers Brothers and Laugh-In.

If it had been possible to cancel a show during its initial broadcast, this show definitely would have been killed even quicker than it was. Ten minutes into it most of the audience was gone anyway.