Patton Oswalt vs. Will McAvoy. (Getty Images)

Today The Hollywood Reporter announced that Aaron Sorkin's confusingly uncanceled HBO drama The Newsroom will be featuring two new cast members in its second season. The show, which has suffered from mixed reviews and sinking ratings, made headlines midseason when Mr. Sorkin fired (almost) all his writers, and apparently replaced them with alt-comedy fans.

So get ready for Will McAvoy to butt heads with not only economist lady Olivia Munn, but also King of Queens* actor Patton Oswalt. And also Rosemary DeWitt.

According to reports:

Oswalt will play Jonas Pfeiffer, the new vice president of human resources at cable network Atlantis Cable News, while DeWitt will portray Rebecca Halliday, a litigator brought in to defend the network in a wrongful termination lawsuit.

The casting marks a reunion for Oswalt and DeWitt, who played a couple on the Showtime dramedy United States of Tara.

You know what? Why not! It cannot hurt to have Patton Oswalt on your show, although we have to wonder why Mr. Oswalt isn't off doing something amazing like a spin-off of Young Adult that is just about the crippled, sardonic Matt Freehauf.

http://youtu.be/-WiojQj04hI
*We apologize for bringing that up, but honestly, most of America probably still only knows Mr. Oswalt as Spence Olchin.

Unsurprisingly, schadenfreude spread quickly through Twitter. Did former MTV VJ  Gideon Yago delete his account over the ordeal? Would a lack of writers make the show better or worse? Why is Will McAvoy tweeting about the Colorado shootings when he lives in a pre-2012 world? Let's find out! (Hashtag SNARKROOM.)

Sorkin's hatred of bloggers, blogs, websites, forums, and pretty much anything printed on any material other than paper that isn't a manifesto devoted to his radiant brilliance has manifested in both his work and interviews plenty of times before.

But this particular exchange—with The Globe and Mail's Sarah Nicole Prickett—was an astounding display of glib, misogynistic, and slightly sociopathic jackassery, especially on behalf of a guy who could probably use the benefit of the doubt as far as People Who Write On The Internet go. Given that, you know, his last television project failed, and also, given that they keep uncovering the various ways he's recycled his own material over the years (from teleplays to commencement speeches), he could probably afford himself the benefit of the doubt.

And yet, this happened:

"Listen here, Internet girl," he says, getting up. "It wouldn’t kill you to watch a film or pick up a newspaper once in a while." I’m not sure how he’s forgotten that I am writing for a newspaper; looking over the publicist’s shoulder, I see that every reporter is from a print publication (do not see: Drew Magary). I remind him. I say also, factually, "I have a New York Times subscription and an HBO subscription. Any other advice?" He looks surprised, then high-fives me. Being not a person who high-fives or generally makes physical contact with interview subjects, I look more surprised.

"I’m sick of girls who don’t know how to high-five," he says. He makes me try to do it "properly," six times. He also makes me laugh; I’m nervous, and it’s so absurd. He loves it. He says, "Let me manhandle you." Then he ambles off, hoping I’ll write something nice, as though he has never known how the news works, how many stories can be true.

Inevitably, The Internet which he so loathes has natrually taken this moment and run with it. Meet Aaron Sorkin's least favorite Tumblr, Hey Internet Girl.

For example:

And:

As well as:

And so on. (Naturally, the entire site has already been copied onto a Buzzfeed post we won't link to, but if whole-hog copy-and-paste from them doesn't certify a meme on some level, what does?)

Aaron Sorkin may finally now realize that you reap what you sow, especially in the Age of Viral Content. Or he's just going to let this aggression build up and release it in the form of more long-winded speeches by The Most Heroic Fictional News Anchor Ever, Will McAvoy, or even worse, deify the blogger-hating Steve Jobs in his screenplay about the Apple founder's life.

We'd put the safe money on the latter of the two options.

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

Last night, he gave us an hour's worth of answers. This morning, some editors of the Observer gathered to talk about how he managed the task.

Let's talk about 'The Newsroom.' As our fearless leader, Spiers, please tell us how you're going to save us all and revolutionize everything.

Elizabeth Spiers, Editor-in-Chief: Oh, I have A PLAN.

Do you, now?

ES: Had to miss 'Newsroom' for a wedding last night. But from what I've heard it doesn't sound like I missed much. Surprisingly to me, [The New Yorker's] Emily Nussbaum HATED it.

Brian Gallagher, Deputy Editor: Not enough Brooklyn for her.

ES: Apparently. Not enough vampires either.

BG: Aside from the cable news talking heads sucking the lifeblood from our great republic.

Jim Hanas, Social Media Editor: I had to watch the finale of Sister Wives. Turns out Meri and Janelle HATE each other.

So, let me guess: You all loved it.

Aaron Gell, Executive Editor: I'm going to just come out and admit that as manipulative and cheesy as it was, I found it unexpectedly moving. I actually teared up at one point. And I can't figure out why.

BG: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH (about the 4th estate and the situation regarding American democracy)! I found it exciting and charming, but also completely full of shit. And the fact that Jeff Daniels is a combination of Little Man Tate, Will Hunting, and Adlai Stevenson is also a little hard to swallow. I mean, the guy seems to know everything.

Right, well, that's Sorkin for you. But wait, Aaron: I kind of want to have a breakthrough here, because the fact that you found it moving is legitimately shocking to me.

AG: Me too. I have a thing for plucky blondes.

BG: Yeah, that was really big of him to remember [the assistant's] name at the end.
I mean, "Your name is Margaret Jordan" is like the equivalent of a raise, it seems.

To take it from the top, for a moment: Can we first say that nobody's ever been to a media panel that engaged, ever? More than anything, this made me think greater media panels were possible.

BG: Yeah, and also the professor moderating it looked nothing like any professor I've ever seen, but beside the point. I would like to have known what the title/conceit of the panel was.

AG: But seriously, why IS America the greatest country in the world?

BG: I mean, the substance of his formulation is probably why most intelligent people would tell you that it is the greatest in the world. The possibility, the premise of America is as Burroughs said, "the last and greatest of human dreams" (though he did say it had been betrayed). But yes, what she had on her magic note cards, that it's what it can be.

Did anyone notice that this is the closest thing to 'The West Wing' that Aaron Sorkin has done since then? Will McEvoy is basically the perfect news anchor in the same way Bartlett was the perfect president. But why does this feel so wrong when that felt so right?

BG: That is a good question.

I tried finding the answer in the idea that people in D.C. loved West Wing, and everyone in media seemingly hates The Newsroom. Is it because media folks are inherently skeptical and self-loathing and distrustful of their own image, and politicos are narcissists (and D.C. is America's Ugly Hollywood)? Or is it because one show's good and the other one isn't? Also of note: Sorkin had actual politicos working on The West Wing. And as insane as they were (Paul Begala, Peggy Noonan), they seemed to get a lot right.

AG: I don't agree that 'The West Wing' felt right. It felt good, for a minute, until I realized we still had Bush in the White House and he was the real president and watching a show wouldn't change that. I suspect the same will happen with 'Newsroom.'

BG: There's no question that Sorkin can push those buttons, but it's sentimental to the point of being cynical.

And yet, it made Gell go emo!

AG: True, I did start to think that Sorkin's ability to pluck those strings has not been all that well understood. The politics and the stylistic tics are maybe beside the point. It's Spielberg style manipuation, and it's really fun while it lasts.

BG: Also, I think it's amusing that the cynosure of journalistic integrity is being rendered as a TELEVISION newsroom. It's like we totally forgot that only one generation ago, television news was already considered a far degraded form of the craft. And that Jeff Daniels is basically answering a situation that television news basically caused to begin with.

Right, Brian, that's the other thing. Not to be 'like that' but I think television news is irrelevant. And boring. And people still don't see what happens at newspapers, which would've made for a better show, despite all conventional wisdom to the contrary. To wit, I present the fifth season of The Wire as evidence for possibility.

AG: I don't think the show is about television or journalism at all but about being stressed at work and having those sad little victories. That's what all compelling TV is about I think.

BG: Right, but I think that for it's imagery, the show had to be about TV.

But there is an interesting question and challenge there, which is: What would cable news look like done well? If it even possible? And I actually did find that compelling.

BG: Brian Lamb does cable news well, but most people find that quite boring.

I can't remember the last time a television show was armed with actual journalists who could break news on air that isn't breaking in to, like, Balloon Boy coverage. Do you think that's even possible?

BG: Speaking of which, it just occurred to me that this show is thus far setting up network news as the antidote to cable news, which is almost hilarious.

Again, I admire the show for trying to come up with what it would look like. Not Sorkin, but the show. Because one guy attempting to answer this is just insanely egotistical, which Aaron Sorkin most certainly is.

BG: My first thought was that 'Newsroom' is to a newsroom as 'General Hospital' is to an actual hospital. It's dramatized to the point of incredulity, but it's still somewhat fun to watch.

Did anybody notice when they invoked Erin Andrews—who was the victim of very real-life sexual harassment and predatory behavior—as the lady who Aaron Sorkin’s very fake character is dating? That was odd.

BG: The first thing I thought was that Sorkin at one point asked her out and she said no, and he was settling that score.

Wouldn't surprise me.

BG: But okay, that is an interesting point. That same issue is sort of in play in the fact that they are seemingly going to cover things retroactively. Like the BP spill. We all know how that played out, but they are going to go back and do the ideal version of the coverage.

Right. I was really skeptical about this when I heard it - and in no way was the BP spill that exciting, nor did news break on it that quickly - but I enjoyed the way it played out. And again, I ask: Could news ever look like that?

AG: Maybe if we all get our news from Newsroom and vote for fake presidents we can pretend that the world is awesome.

BG: And then once that fake world is well-established, we can secede from the real world.

With the vampires from True Blood.

ES: Sorkin's ability to get away with preachy exposition by coating with wit is sort of amazing. Anybody else and I'd want to punch the writer.

BG: I feel the same, except for the "anybody else" part. Can you imagine how annoying Sorkin must've been in college?

Insufferable. Especially at Syracuse.

BG: He's like a hidebound version of Diablo Cody. All the dialogue is impossibly witty, and I think that in the end it's at the expense of any depth. After a while, it all seems implausible, precisely because of how "good" the dialogue is.

AG: Maybe we should support this... the media hasn't had a particularly good rep lately. An hour of propaganda on premium cable every week could do wonders for our careers.

BG: [That wit] is fine in something like 'In The Loop,' because it's not aiming for profundity. But Sorkin most certainly is.

But again, 'The West Wing' managed to have witty characters, and it did at moments achieve great moments of profundity. I don't see this show winning a Peabody.

BG: Are you kidding? The media loves nothing more than to give itself awards. And a show about the slipping standards of news? I'll eat my hat if it doesn't win a Peabody.

JH: "Why does everyone in media hate the show so much?" Um. Because we hate everything, especially if it involves anyone we might run into.

Yeah, but everyone in media loved the fifth season of 'The Wire.' And David Simon was actually a reporter at The Baltimore Sun.

AG: Well, Sorkin DATED MODO. Hello?

BG: To be fair, everyone in the New York media demographic loved the entire run of The Wire. But point taken.

ES: I think that's the rare instance of media loving something because it's actually good.

BG: Back to the content for a second. It really annoys me that they seem to be setting up some sort of sexual/romantic past with Jeff Daniels and Emily Mortimer, and from the allusions in the dialogue that somehow precipitated his stopping caring about journalistic standards...

Right? Not to flash a feminist card, but why are all the women on the show so patently nerve-wracked and emotional?

BG: Also, it was very funny that they had to explain away her seemingly discordant speech about American democracy delivered in Oxbridge's finest elocution. "She was born in America!"

The Power of the Studio Note (also see: Dev Patel's entire role on the show).

JH: I'm still stuck on this thing about what the New York media will embrace and reject. What do 'Mad Men' and and 'The Wire' have in common that 'Girls' and 'The Newsroom' lack? Or maybe it's the other way around.

BG: [But] the New York media certainly seems to have embraced 'Girls,' no?

ES: I think 'Girls' lacks sophistication, vis a vis the other shows. But people don't measure them against each other because everyone knows it's Lena Dunham's debut. And there's a bit of condescending head patting that she could do her very own TV show.

FINAL QUESTION TIME. Why did Gell get weepy? Everyone, GO!

AG: That's easy: male menopause.

I think it's because you were coming to terms with enjoying it. The show, not male menopause.

BG: I mean, the show I think is good television. I just don't think it should be read as legitimate media criticism, or even having much bearing on reality. Like most television.

AG: I think it's because putting out a weekly paper is hard and stressful and requires a certain amount of self-delusion that what we're doing matters, or could matter. And editing a bunch of starry-eyed 24-year-olds is a bitch, and like Will I actually can't remember half their names, and yet it's inspiring when they succeed and Chartbeat lights up and the lawyers start calling... In that sense, on a psychological level, 'Newsroom' taps into a certain wish I think I'm harboring about what we're doing having some kind of meaning. Because it certainly doesn't pay that much.

BG: Yeah, but Gell, don't forget the time you gave up $1 million dollars a year of your salary for the ability to fire [Observer managing editor Michael] Woodsmall at the end of every week.

AG: A good investment, I think.

Last thoughts, anyone?

JH: "[Keels Over]"

ES: I was looking at galleys and I just had the sudden realization that the U.S. is not the best country in the world. I'm going to go rethink my entire career.

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

We've come up with seven additional episode arcs based on the news of yesteryear: feel free to add your favorite 2010 moments in the comments!

"I spent almost eight years working in cable news before I decided earlier this year to exit the industry in  a quiet, dignified fashion, so naturally the show piqued my curiosity," he wrote. "Sorkin deserves credit for nailing a lot of the details of the milieu. But given how many of the little things he gets right, it’s surprising that he gets a few of the big ones so wrong.

One thing Mr. Sorkin gets right, according to Mr. Muto, is the "old guard news honcho," who likes to talk about how journalism worked "back-in-my-day." In the show, it's the bow-tied news division president, Charlie, played by Sam Waterston. At Fox News, that role is played by none other than president Roger Ailes.

"Fox News president Roger Ailes is known for regaling staff with stories about his TV past during speeches at company functions. I personally heard at least three retellings of the time he worked for The Mike Douglas Show and had to set up a functioning bowling alley in the studio with less than 24-hours notice."

According to Poynter, Mr. Muto is no longer working for Gawker, although the company will continue to support him legally in the criminal investigation over information he leaked to Gawker.

The Newsroom. Yes, via Deadline Hollywood MediaBistro's TVNewser (earlier this month)*: The Newsroom.

The show was tentatively/previously titled More As This Story Develops, an name that lends itself to slightly less hubris than The Newsroom in the way The West Wing could've just been called The Oval Office or The White House or simply The President. Of all the films made about media, none of them quite match up to Network, and those with more self-important titles, like:

The Paper
Broadcast News
Interview
Celebrity

And so forth have paid a price for their boldness up front: falling short of Network.

Let's face it: Even Keith Olbermann—who Sorkin's new leading character, Will McCallister (to be played by Jeff Daniels), is loosely based on—isn't pompous enough to call his own show The Newsroom. It's not the title of something Sorkin ruined for everyone; it's the title of something Sorkin should've never used. Also, Sorkin hasn't done well with TV title switcharoos: the last time it happened, Studio 7 on the Sunset Strip became Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. Etymological semantics? Maybe.

Enough to give us premonitions of what's in store,** especially in the wake of the fact that HBO has yet again shut down more beloved shows just this week? Absolutely.

HBO dropped the title in a new promo spot, seen here:

[*Apparently, Deadline Hollywood claimed this story as news tonight when in fact, as it was noted to us, MediaBistro's TVNewser blog broke it almost three weeks ago. But we'll keep this up because we've got a nice timely peg with HBO's destructive act of subscriber sadism in canceling Bored to Death. **That said, we've read two drafts of the script and loved it. And to that end? We said the same thing about Studio 7.]

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek