My view of Will and Grace was formed by watching an episode. I then understood how Black people feel about Amos and Andy. From what I read in the gay press, and from informal discussions, this view is widespread among Gays.

GLAAD does excellent work. But GLAAD exists to interface with the outside world, not represent Gay people, but to represent our interests, which are different things. GLAAD can endorse all sorts of things that Gay people find offensive if it is not hostile. I much prefered Queer as Folk which GLAAD sort of avoided.

In LA BBCAmerica is on channel 131 which involves a fairly major level of cable. I will watch Torchwood next week, been on my timetable for weeks. Its star, John Barrowman, has an interesting take on being Gay:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m27Awmlgi38

This is the first of 6 videos on the subject, just keep moving from one to the next.

Will & Grace GLAAD To Be Honored

(Daily News, LA, April 9, 2006) Greg Hernandez, Staff writer

HOLLYWOOD - NBC’s long-running sitcom “Will & Grace,” now in its eighth and final season, was named outstanding comedy series Saturday night at the 17th annual GLAAD Media Awards.

Stars Eric McCormack, Debra Messing, Megan Mullally and Sean Hayes were all on hand at the Kodak Theatre to accept the GLAAD prize for their series, the finale of which will air May 18.

“It’s such an honor to receive this award,” said the show’s co-creator, David Kohan, who stood on stage with the stars. “We are truly grateful for everything that GLAAD has done for us.”

The Kodak Theatre audience gave a prolonged standing ovation for “Will & Grace,” which was among the mainstream media projects and individuals honored by GLAAD (The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) for what the organization called fair, accurate and inclusive representations of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their issues.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/‘WILL+&+GRACE’+GLAAD+TO+BE+HONORED.-a0144362047

One quick Google search shows that your views on Will & Grace and the show’s portrayal of homosexuality are out of date by a decade:
http://archive.glaad.org/eye/will_grace.php (hint: read beyond the first paragraph.)

Personally, I found (and find, in the reruns) Will & Grace to be genuinely funny, with excellent writing and great comic timing. It didn’t compromise yet still had great crossover appeal.

As for the numbers, I can see you’re not going to be satisfied by the facts, an choose to dwell on some kind of expectation game of what the number of gay characters *should* be (and also ignoring guest/recurring roles, soap operas, etc.) So I’m done with that.

Again, you don’t watch “teevee” so let me help you. re: Torchwood is currently showing in the UK and USA. “A five part mini-series entitled Torchwood: Children of Earth, aired on BBC One and BBC HD between 6 July and 10 July 2009.” (from Wikipedia. It airs starting July 20 on BBC America.)

In the vast majority of American homes, cable or satellite is the way we get TV (esp. after the Digital switchover) so basic cable no longer counts as “premium” channels, necessarily.

Start with House, Weeds, Grey’s Anatomy, Nip/Tuck, Torchwood, The Office, Ugly Betty, 30 Rock, Dirty Sexy Money, Mad Men, Desperate Housewives, and Brothers & Sisters. All have regular cast members as gay characters.

Or, check out that Right-Wing think-tank GLAAD, which sent out a press release which was dutifully regurgitated by that TOTALLY Right-leaning blog, The Huffington Post, which reported finding 16 gay characters on “teevee” last fall:

NEW YORK — Broadcast television will have 16 gay and bisexual regular characters in prime-time series this fall, more than double the seven of a year ago, a new study has found.

The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation said it was a positive sign of networks making their shows more representative, although more work needed to be done. These characters accounted for 2.6 percent of all the regular characters in TV series, up from 1.1 percent last year and 1.3 percent in 2006, according to the study, released Monday.

GLAAD President Neil Giuliano singled out Fox for having five such regular characters this fall, considering there were none a year earlier. The character Thirteen on “House” is bisexual, while the new “Do Not Disturb” has a gay man

So, to sum up. .3%? No, it’s more like 2.6 percent. “One” gay character is on TV? No, at least 16 REGULAR characters (with no doubt many more “recurring” and “guest” characters.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/23/gay-characters-on-tv-doub_n_128526.html

BTW, leftist think-tanks and those actors and actresses who bill themselves as “experts” on marriage, science and culture get plenty of press releases and soundbites regurgitated in the MSM, too, not just the libertarian and Right wing ones.

And of course my anger also covers a mathematically ignorant press that uncritically passes along such garbage from sources that know it will work that way.

The religion beat press seems particularly prone to this. They really need to have a better understanding of statistics. There was one here about the RC Deacon program where it was stated that Hispanic men were ‘pouring in’. I looked at the numbers and did some simple calculations. Found that 30% of RC’s in the US are Hispanic and 18% of the Deacons are Hispanic. That is a shortfall of 40% just to maintain parity. The dominant method of counting seems to be: one, two, three, many.

However, in the ’80s I ran into many news stories that were just clones of press releases from conservative think-tanks, that used statistics to distort some aspect of society in the service of some obvious policy position. Eventually I came to be suspicious on principle of any statistical statement about society from anyone with an axe to grind.

Stephen A may have had comparable experiences and, if he is less than familiar with statistics, have no way of separating the wheat from the chaff.

It makes me angry that numbers, which were invented to clarify things, have become such a tool of misrepresenting things that they can no longer be trusted. And of course my anger also covers a mathematically ignorant press that uncritically passes along such garbage from sources that know it will work that way. I could start a blog called GetMath.

As anyone well knows, statistics can be manipulated endlessly to make any point the speaker wants to make.

I know nothing of the sort. My impression has been that most religion beat reporters are inemnumerate, and probably share your notions about quantitative analysis.

The press should not be relying on experiential opinion when it is entirely possible to do a simple count. Which I did using the reference you directed me to. I did a simple count, and found that in the English speaking world, prime time/MS teevee has produced 67 GLBT characters in 37 years. Removing the English, Canadian and Australian, that gives us about 1 per year. No rational observer would call this vast or an avalanche. And if you don’t like that, produce your own objective numbers, which the press should be doing.

Ask anyone of the conservative persuasion and they will happily give their experiential opinion of the vast number of gay characters and avalanche of pro-gay references in the entertainment and news media. Perhaps total dominance of the positive portrayal of gays in the media isn’t enough for some.

Playing with numbers is tricky.

Statistics is a straight forward, logical process. Nothing tricky about it.

Back to blacks and the article, the story of how many did NOT support gay marriage, and are not fans of gay sexuality, has not been told in the media for almost obvious reasons: it undermines the “civil rights” storyline of the gay marriage advocates - something that’s gone unquestioned in the media, like many other points of “fact” that are endlessly repeated.

Well, this has been done endlessly in the Gay media, along with really angry comments. The MSM do not seem to cover this much. Interestingly, and counter to what you insinuate, the pressure to kill the story comes from Black politicians and activists. The process is clear at any progressive or liberal blog: Gays want this story out; Blacks want it killed.

Playing with numbers is tricky. I think women on TV are far overrepresented, and as I said, a positive Christian character probably is in that .03% range. Blacks, I believe, are slightly overrepresented, but as I said, Hispanics are probably 5% of the TV characters and 15-20% of the population at this point.

Back to blacks and the article, the story of how many did NOT support gay marriage, and are not fans of gay sexuality, has not been told in the media for almost obvious reasons: it undermines the “civil rights” storyline of the gay marriage advocates - something that’s gone unquestioned in the media, like many other points of “fact” that are endlessly repeated.