She got the first four episodes of "24" and, by gosh, she didn't bust the release date. I know she won't have anything relevant to say about the series, but at least she learned one bit of professionalism, and so won't be banned from any other future goodies from NBC and Real Time Productions.

Of course, anybody that cares about the series, and who knows that the Internet is more than just "web sites," has already downloaded those four episodes. Others know that the series is being relaunched with two nights of double episodes, to try to make a splash against the other returning shows like "Lost" and "Heroes." And to show that I have at least the minimal professionalism of Havrilesky, I won't comment either.

In the meantime, what is this about Showtime's attempt to establish itself as The Gay Network? Besides "The L Word," they ran "Queer As Folk" and the terrible Internet cartoon "Queer Duck." I've only seen these shows when travelling, on hotel TV; I dropped the Showtime network years ago.

Back then, Showtime tried to establish itself with original shows, most of which betrayed a New York/theatre attitude that was refreshing. They made a series based on the play "Steambath," about the afterlife being a locker room, with God as a pissed-off Puerto Rican towel attendant. They were the last venue for "SCTV," with only a fraction of the show's original energy - making it twice as good as any other sketch show. "It's Gary Shandling's Show" was one of the few wiseass takes on the standard sitcom that actually worked. They let John Byner and Bob Einstein have a free comic hand with "Bizarre." And they had the first entertaining show about gay life, "Brothers."

None of those shows had legs. They didn't bring in droves of people to subscribe to the network. Aside from "Shandling," the shows weren't syndicated to broadcast TV. About the only thing Showtime had was slightly lowered censorship standards about sex and nudity, compared to HBO. And slowly, the network started emphasizing that aspect, with the revenge (with nudity!) show "Red Shoe Diaries," the romance (with nudity!) "Love Street" and assorted junk movies (with nudity!)

The non-sex shows that Showtime has, like "Jeremiah" and "Dead Like Me," haven't gained any legs; I think only "Dead" is running on basic cable now. The sex shows can't make it to other cable networks; it isn't simply a matter of covering up obscenities and nudity like the censored "Sopranos", since the obscenities and nudity are all that's in those shows.

It's a good question why Showtime has decided to chase a niche audience of gays and lesbians, with programming that isn't any more vital or dramatic than, say, a Polish polka party show or an old-style country and gospel music show. And why Showtime has decided this programming slate will bring them any success. Not that you'll see that question asked in this column.

There's no point in putting up disclaimers like "I don't kill gay people at night" or "Some of my best friends..." because, if you're determined to hate me, it won't matter.

My point is that these Showtime shows are simply "branded" as being gay. If they were about straight people they'd be cancelled in ten minutes over on Fox. From what I've seen, there's nothing very special or very good about them; it's only the "gay friendly" label that keeps people watching.

On the old Quinn Martin series "The Invaders," one episode was the Black People episode. For the most part the series had been all caucasian, and someone must have shamed Martin into doing something with black people. So he had a couple of black actors appear on this episode, and produced black aliens. (Besides the un-bendable pinky finger, the black aliens' palms were not pink-colored; they were the uniform brown color of the rest of their skin.)

That episode closed with some yadda, yadda, yadda about brotherhood and how the few black humans who survived now knew there was an "alien race" out to kill them. And that was that. I don't believe there were any more black characters in any other episodes, alien or human.

So, by doing an episode which contained some stuff about black people, did Quinn Martin prove himself not to be a racist? Did he break the color line in mid-60's dramatic television? I'll bet all he did was get a grumbling notice of approval in "Jet" or "Ebony" about it. ("Hey, David Vincent comes up against black aliens. We're so appreciative.")

Meanwhile, an earlier Showtime series, "Brothers," was the first series to have gay characters on a regular basis. It even had a "flaming" character, Donald Maltby, who was more than just a rimshot joke; he could become deadly serious. This show was forgotten, perhaps because it did something that the current Showtime "gay shows" don't do; they showed gay people as people, interacting with the whole world, not just other gay people.

But that isn't what Showtime wanted. So they ghettoize gays and lesbians. They're pursuing them as a niche audience, an audience which just happens to spend a lot more on entertainment (pay cable channels included) than the hetero audience. Hey, there's a whole night of shows that do a lot of gay stuff! None dare call it exploitation.

Hey, "Weeds" has its characters encountering a gay drug dealer and a gay FBI agent. We're so appreciative.