Viewers love to campaign to save their favorite shows. Who knew some could be so rabid they'd mount an effort to see their fave program canceled rather than watch it change?

		Readers' remote: keep or cancel? Graphic: Top Vote Getters in post-gazette.com Keep or Cancel poll More results of the post-gazette.com Keep or Cancel poll

Some "JAG" fans bucked the usual "spare our show" trend in the Post-Gazette's annual poll, "Readers' Remote: Keep or Cancel?" Instead of campaigning to renew the long-running series, fans wanted to see it end rather than continue without series star David James Elliott, whose contract was not renegotiated for an 11th season.

"In the past two seasons, the characters and story lines have morphed from believable and enjoyable to illogical, despicable, boring and downright painful to watch," wrote 36-year-old Shannon Rusch of Dallas.

"I do not appreciate the way in which the stories are heading -- disrespect for the military, improper military protocol, disrespect for females," wrote 60-year-old Barbara Pryor of Tekonsha, Mich.

Perhaps CBS heard their cries. The network put "JAG" down like Old Yeller earlier this month, after many fans had already voted. The series finale will air April 29.

The more usual "Keep or Cancel?" efforts to win shows another season yielded votes and passionate pleas for low-rated, on-the-bubble shows such as NBC's "American Dreams," Fox's "Arrested Development," UPN's "Veronica Mars" and The WB's "Jack & Bobby." Fans of these series posted links to our poll on fan Web sites and encouraged their fellow fans to vote -- not enough to stuff the ballot box, but enough to make their voices known.

Katie Johnston of Mt. Lebanon said she's tired of the way Fox is exploiting "American Idol," but the 18-year-old is a fan of low-rated, critically acclaimed "Arrested Development."

"I love the way 'Arrested' is shot. It looks raw," she wrote. "Really, TV needs more single-camera comedies. I think those multi-camera shows with laugh tracks really undermine the intelligence of their audiences. I often feel more stupid for watching them."

Jo DeBolt, 54, of Mars bemoaned the likely cancellation of "American Dreams."

"I'm sure that 'American Dreams' is headed for cancellation, but it's a show that our whole family enjoyed (teens, pre-teens, and parents)," she wrote. "We also like 'Jack and Bobby' but have found the changing days and times made it harder to find."

Vanessa Trask, 23, of Chicago worried about the futures of "Veronica Mars" -- renewed for a second season after she cast her vote -- and the still-shaky prospects for "Arrested Development."

"How sad that two of the smartest shows on television are in danger of being canceled," she wrote, "but all those stupid fat-guy-with-beautiful-wife sitcoms will remain on the air for another thousand years."

With all the Internet-based campaigns for younger-skewing shows this year, it's not surprising that fewer votes were cast from within the Pittsburgh viewing area than last year, which benefited from the hometown fervor over "The Guardian." (This year's full results are online at www.post-gazette.com/tv.)

This year 3,420 ballots were cast, down from 4,465 last year, but up from 3,135 in 2003. Fifty-eight percent of voters were from Western Pennsylvania (compared to 73 percent last year), and with so many of the on-the-bubble shows skewing to young female viewers, they made up the bulk of the voters, who were 64 percent female. This year's poll drew more than double the number of participants ages 12 to 17 compared to the past two years.

Once again, the top shows to receive "cancel" votes were exclusively reality series, and generally those of the lower-rated, quickly canceled variety.

"I used to swear on a stack of Bibles that I didn't watch a lot of reality TV. I turned out to be a liar, but not by choice," wrote 33-year-old Amy Ganser of Brookline. "We are so inundated with reality shows now, that just by turning on the TV, inevitably, you're seeing a reality show; sometimes there is no other choice (besides turning the TV off). And the level that these shows has sunk to makes me sad to think that this is television today."

Even self-proclaimed fans of the reality genre seem to have had enough.

"Everyone is always bashing reality TV. I am a reality TV junkie, but I know the good ones ('The Amazing Race,' 'Survivor') from the bad ('The Bachelor,' 'The Bachelorette') and the uber-bad ('Wickedly Perfect,' 'The Will')," wrote Dwight Chambers, 30, of Pittsburgh. "Come on, networks ... we have enough reality!"

Some other noteworthy comments:

"If Philo T. Farnsworth had known what TV was going to turn into, he probably wouldn't have wasted his time" -- Bruce Mountjoy, 45, Ingram.

"I voted to cancel 'The Bachelor'/'The Bachelorette' due to the lack of cultural diversity of the featured bachelor/ettes. It would be nice to see a person of color looking for love for a change. As a person of color myself, I do not feel valued as a viewer when I cannot see someone like myself reflected at least sometimes on a show I enjoy" -- Felicia Drew, 35, Pittsburgh.

"Get back to sitcoms and non-police dramas. Every show does not have to be reality or a drama involving police and/or forensics" -- Jaime Linderman, 39, Port Vue.

"Television is evil! YOU WILL GO TO HELL FOR WATCHING THAT GARBAGE." -- Anonymous, 70, female.

'Stacked' to compensate

The most interesting thing about the new Fox sitcom "Stacked" (8:30 p.m. Wednesday, Fox) is the way it's structured. Although Pam Anderson gets star billing, in last week's pilot she was almost a secondary character, getting many fewer lines than her male co-stars. It's probably a conscious move to compensate for her acting skills, or lack thereof, particularly when it comes to comic timing.

Low 'Likeability' factor

This is PBS?

It was bad enough when WQED was churning out doo-wop special after doo-wop special, but at least those programs, though repetitive, had some cultural value.

Now WQED has jumped on the self-help huckster bandwagon, producing "The Likeability Factor," hosted by author Tim Sanders, who's written a new book of the same name.

"It is my passion that we learn to make a priority out of being likeable as people," Sanders says with the same insincere-by-way-of-repetition passion PBS's Ken Burns is noted for. "If we made this a priority, like being rich or beautiful, this world would be a better place for everybody, don't you think?"

Off-putting, impish Sanders preaches at viewers (and a seemingly comatose studio audience) about the need to be likeable, which basically boils down to being a good person.

The show, including a few interviews, was shot almost entirely inside the WQED studio and feels just as claustrophobic as you might expect.

What does this have to do with culture or true education? What does it have to do with WQED's stated goal of connecting to the community? It's junk programming, certainly not the kind of show PBS proponents have in mind when they try to find reasons to defend its very existence.

"Unlikeability is your tendency to create negative psychological experiences in other people," Sanders says.

Hmmm, that was sort of how I felt watching this show ...

New time slot

This is the last Thursday for the "Tuned In" column. Starting next week we move to Fridays.

In television, it's a death knell to be relocated from must-see Thursday to T.G.I.F., but, hey, at least our episode order wasn't cut and we aren't being pulled off the schedule for May sweeps, which begins a week from today.

The online-only TV Q&A will also be posted on Friday instead of Thursday.

TV Q&A

This week's TV Q&A responds to questions about "Reno 911," the salaries of local news anchors and reporters and the future of "The West Wing."