LOS ANGELES -- The Vicodin-popping Dr. House has been tormenting doctors and captivating fans for half a decade.

Now in its sixth season, the unconventional medical drama House on News Corp. network Fox is charming 16.9 million viewers on a weekly basis, up more than 50% from last season, according to The Nielsen Company.

The show's executive producers, Katie Jacobs and creator David Shore, spoke to Forbes about luring viewers, breaking rules and dealing with a major morale problem on set.

Forbes: In your sixth season you're still growing your audience. How?

Shore: We certainly didn't come out of the gate huge [in the first season] and I think that has sort of helped us. People have come to our show rather than have the show thrust upon them. I think that's helped us in the long run. When something becomes more of a phenomenon than a show, there's a certain pushback or resentment from the audience. Our audience has, for the most part, simply found us and has remained loyal to us. And we try very hard not to let it get tired, so I'd like to think that that helps as well.

If the show were debuting today, would a broadcast network have the same patience to let it find an audience?

Jacobs: We weren't doing that poorly. [laughs]

Shore: There's this myth around us that we had eight viewers. We weren't doing great, I'll be the first to admit that, but we were doing better than everything else they had.

As a broadcast storyteller, what's the biggest challenge facing you today?

Shore: If you're referring to broadcast, as opposed to cable, there's obviously a difference, but I have very rarely felt hamstrung in my storytelling. We obviously can't show nudity, we can't curse and we have to have commercial breaks built into it, but the essentials of the story wouldn't be any different anywhere else.

Jacobs: We don't feel particularly restrained or hemmed in by being a network show in terms of the stories we want to do. Every season, we've managed to do a few episodes that really break the format of our show and the network has been incredibly supportive of that. I'd put those up against the shows I love on cable and I'd say they feel equally as innovative. The only thing I see as a pain is having to produce six acts each week. Really, I don't see any other disadvantages; only huge advantages.

What are those huge advantages?

Jacobs: 20 million [viewers].

Shore: The advantage is broad-casting. We get a very large audience, and there's no point in telling stories unless you're telling it to people.

During the writers' strike, there was a lot of talk about ushering in a new era of cost-conscious television. Any evidence of it?

Shore: No, I don't think things happen that dramatically or that quickly. In truth, I think we happen to be living in a very good time for television. There's a lot of really high-quality TV out there. Television will always exist in one form or another--the medium of delivery may change but there will always be a demand for high-quality storytelling and good shows. I feel very confident about that.

As the storytelling platforms or delivery systems proliferate, how has the process been impacted?

Shore: It really hasn't. It may one day, but we've been on the Fox television network for six years and our budget has gone up over that time. They haven't asked for different kinds of stories or anything like that. I think we're lucky because we're a hit so they leave us alone and let us tell the stories we want to tell for the most part.

Jacobs: Really, a bigger thing that impacts us is the fact that [General Electric owned NBC Universal is our studio and we air on Fox.

What sort of challenge does that present?

Jacobs: Historically speaking, regimes are made and remembered for the shows that they brought to the air. So we're team players and we understand why we're on at 8 p.m., but we could certainly be doing higher numbers if we weren't on at 8 p.m. Having been on for awhile, what's harder for us is that we don't think we're over and we want the same care and attention [as other shows get.] The fear is that the powers that be at both the studio and network are basically making their brand name by the new shows that they bring on. That's the fear.

Is it the reality?

Jacobs: Well, I'm not going to piss off my bosses ...

House turns one of TV's golden rules--a lead has to be likable--on its head. Has that proved challenging?

Jacobs: He's not likable? [laughs]

Shore: Writers have always wanted to write unlikeable characters and networks have always wanted to put on likable characters. I'll say this: Fox never pushed back on it. I think the reality is that saying you want a likable character is very simple and perhaps cowardly. Write characters that people like to watch. Historically, network television has been rather narrow-minded on that, but I really have to give Fox credit because they never asked us to give him a puppy.

Though you were able to keep Dr. Kutner's suicide a secret last season, you weren't able this season. What impact does a leak like this have?

Shore: It's very annoying. It's really important to us that we be able to tell our stories and have our audience enjoy them the way they were intended to be delivered. We work hard to keep story points secret, but the reality is all it takes is one person to screw up that secret.

Jacobs: What annoys us is we know exactly how it happened and we know how it continues to happen, we just aren't completely sure of who's doing it. Mike Ausiello, who writes for Entertainment Weekly, has, as he calls it publicly, a "mole" on the set. David and I have gone down to the set and warned them. We've said, 'We all put in long hours and we want to feel comfortable where we work.' It's actually a real problem--a problem with morale as it takes away from the job we're trying to do.

Source: Forbes