[derail]
Speaking of evil, atheistic humanism/naturalism, this type of behavior is a perfect example of what creationists insist does not exist: A neutral mutation. I strongly suspect the reason that some dogs and cats react to TV, but most don't, is differences in neural wiring. Such differences could only come about through mutation, but...talk about a useless mutation! What possible survival advantage does the ability to watch television give an animal? And what crazy owner would say, "Hey, this dog watches TV, let's STUD him!"
There's probably all sorts of mutations like that, happening all the time, but no one notices because the right environment has to exist.
[/derail]
This actually brings up another factor, making any analysis of dogs & TV even trickier. There would probably be a great difference in the reactions of a sighthound (Afghan, greyhound, Borzoi) compared to a scenthound (any hound). The working breeds have diverged so much that my guess is that, on the whole, you'd get much stronger reactions to TV, or any visual stimuli, from a Borzoi than a bloodhound. With Borzois, it's all eyes, but bloodhounds probably don't even believe something is real unless it smells real. Or at least SMELLS.
These "instincts" tend to drop off quickly even within breeds unless you specifically breed for them, however, so among mostly show-dog lines the differences would be less than among actual working dogs.
I'd suspect cats would be more universal in their response, but my pseudoscientific guess is that for meaningful comparison of dogs you'd have to get groups of working retrievers, then groups of working (tracking) bloodhounds or coonhounds, etc., being careful not to mix in foo-foo show dogs to cloud the issue. Or just use show retrievers, show hounds, etc. The scary part is that individual dog personalities vary so much that I suspect it'd skew results badly. In every litter of working retrievers, there are a couple of snoring fireplace dogs, some middling ones that display some interest in a bird wing, or a dead pigeon ... and then there are two who will fight over the bird carcass ... and one that will always WIN and carry off his prize. That's the one you train & breed, of course. It also explains those dead birds in baggies next to the ice cream in my freezer.
You'd probably get a different overall response from the "low end" of even working retrievers, compared to the wild-eyed ones that swing from the chandelier & break into the liquor cabinet. Hmmmmmmm.
Looking back, most of our dogs, both rescue & bred here, tend to be scent hounds and a few terriers. No sighthounds except a couple of Great Danes, one of which is essentially blind & partially deaf. This might also explain why our nose-using dogs are not particularly overwhelmed by TV.
Does this make the issue sufficiently murky? I suspect the scientific answers are a long way off and I'll just have to stick to guesswork & tea leaves.
Probably better to just test a bunch of fluffy show dogs and see if the government will fund it.
If he sits through a couple of episodes of Star Trek in their entirety, I may just approach Randi for the million... 
