August 28 - September 1, 2006

[dragonflies]

I agree, spoilers aren't the problem, it's bad writing. Nothing on AMC makes any sense at all. Not one single storyline.

Anyways, does anyone know if AMC has ever hit this low in the ratings in the past?

[PJA]

Well I can't speak for ABC soaps because I don't watch them, but I'm sure spoilers have helped to deteriorate the ratings. I do think quality has a lot to do with why the ABC soaps are in the predicament they are in because they are hitting new lows almost every week.

[dragonflies]

I don't see how, considering that alot of people who don't even go on the internet most likely don't even read spoilers. The percentage of viewers who read spoilers most likely is a very small percentage.

Spoilers have been around even when alot of soaps were doing well in the ratings, and they don't seem to hurt popular prime time shows like 24 and whatnot.

[EricMontreal22]

I'm not sure--even ten years ago spoilers were no where as speicfic as they are now--you wouldn't knwo exactly what would happen on what day, complete often with medianet photos of it.

I bet quite a large percentage of soap fans who are online casually read spoilers to some extent--and a huge percentage of soap fans are online.

[SteveFrame]

Yes but it is not just the Internet where you get it from. The magazines today have lots more in them than they did say even 5 years ago. You can go to the grocery store and while standing in line to check out, can find out a lot just on the cover.

As I said years ago, you didn't even know who was leaving until after they were gone. It made for high drama and more mystery.

Some of the best deaths on daytime that I ever remember were so unexpected and so much more dramatic because of it. I can't imagine what it would have been like if I had known that Steve Frame was going to be killed in that plane crash on AW; or that Mary Matthews was dying on AW; or that John Randolph was going to be killed in that fire in 1979 on AW; or that Marlena was going to be a victim of the Salem STrangler (which it turned out to be Samantha) but all the drama today would be lost because the public would have known that - Soap Opera Weekly would have it as their cover story; or what about when Jenny Nelson was blown up on the back of that jet ski on AMC.

A show like EON would really hurt in this day and time, because they depended on the intrigue of their stories to not be revealed. Many of their greatest stories had the element of surprise.

I know that the Internet is the biggest culprit of the spoilers. But they are not the only way people find out. We have the magazines, TV even reveals some of them, the promos are more elaborate today, and then word of mouth. I know my mother never read magazines much or the looked on the Internet but I always kept her informed of things I knew, and I know others do with their loved ones too.

I know that quality has a lot to do with it, but the spoilers and all have even contributed to the bad quality. Things just aren't that exciting anymore and makes them seem even worse than they may be. I know even on some of the shows now that I consider bad, if I go spoiler free and add a little bit of mystery to it, it doesn't seem quite as bad.

[Mitchapalooza]

I am sure spoilers definetly do contribute to ratings decreases, but for me personally, they do not make me not tune into my show, if anything I just get more excited to see it play out and MAKE SURE to tune in.

However, that being said, I will admit that there have been a few times where it has been ALOT easier to miss watching, because I knew I could go read the Early Edition and get a full-detailed play by play of what happened or what was going to happen.

I have done this often when I have class all day long and then work and then have plans for the night, thus this would prevent me from watching DAYS, and so first thing in the morning I go read EE so I don't fall behind.

[PhoenixRising05]

Here is what has killed soaps IMO and I will rank the reasons for you:

1.) Bad Writing

2.) Too much details in spoilers and too many spoilers.

3.) Change in lifestyle/climate (bascially people having less time to watch due to work and responsibilities)

4.) Rabid Fanbases trying to control everything a show does and fans that have grown extremely picky.

Days is one of the biggest offenders of this. They bascially tell the mags almost everything in detail and the spoilers tell us everything as well. Then they go and give you the last scenes on the next show half the time in the day ahead previews and their promos always reveal too much. Hopefully that changes now because the idea is to give fans enough in promos/spoilers to get them to watch but not so much that they know everything and are able to choose what to watch.

I also think the way fans think and act has changed. In the 90's, fans didn't care if couples were apart for awhile because they didn't always know what was coming and there was much more dedication to their shows. In today's climate, you have rabid fan groups writing in to shows acting as if they are the writers and they never seem to be totally happy. Fans are so busy picking apart shows now that they fail to sometimes even enjoy anymore. Days in the 90's worked so well because people stuck around for the ride and didn't judge things until they played out. Fans were just much more dedicated back then. Now some fans quit if one person leaves a show or if one person comes back. There are far too many people now that watch for individuals rather then the whole show and that was not the case in the 90's. Somewhere around 2000 this began and we got all the couple nicknames and such and now people are just way too eager to tune out and not give things a chance. There are far too many fickle fans. I just hope if other soaps follow Days, Y&R, and ATWT's lead and get good writing fans will tune back. I think all writers just need to worry about writing great stories and not about couples, etc. That worked in the 90's and it will work now. I am not saying break up couples on purpose but I would rather have big couples break up then see them in countless triangles or face conflict after conflict. People want realism in soaps and in real life couples break up. Soaps shouldn't be afraid to breakup couples whether they are supercouples or not. Soaps would be more fresher that way and it would not be the same olf circle of breaking up and making up only to break up at some point again. Fans should never dictate the writing. Give the fans what they want is necessary but letting them constantly affect ongoing story is not what is needed.

Another key, especially during cast cutting times and such, is that fans need to realize this is a business and, at some point, need to realize that cuts are necessary and that characters some time have to go regardless of popularity. Sometimes these decisions aren't always successful but they are done for reason and, at some point, fans need to choose whether it is more important for their shows to go on or for their favorite character or couple to stay and risk digging a bigger hole. This is all just my IMO and I am not pointing fingers at any one show or group but I just feel these are the biggest issues.

[SteveFrame]

Great post Phoenix. I agree with everything (almost) that you said. I have always been one who was a fan of the show, and never felt that I could leave because of a character. And I know that I would never leave over a couple or a character leaving. I do still stand by that. I have never been a bigger fan of any actor as I was George Reinholt (and still am) but I did not quit watching AW and they fired him.

But I have found out that I can quit watching a show because of a character. And I have not problem with it. It is what that character represents, and I do not feel that he is needed. His being brought back to the show brings the whole credibility of the show down - and it was restoring it. And even people who are not fans of the show have noticed it. Now all that will come back. Whether the character is written different or not, just the fact that he is there will cause people to remember all the sci-fi stuff and the cartoonish way he was written before. With him gone and the focus on a new generation, they could have continued on moving forward and regaining momentum toward restoring that. They can't do that now that they are bringing him back. Maybe after 2 or 3 years of him being written different (if he is), they can but they could do it a whole lot quicker without him.

Bringing him back is no better than what people have criticized other shows for. It is just a quick way maybe to bring some old viewers back who liked him, and maybe to get a big ratings surge. He is not needed on the show, and the show could continue without him.

And yes I agree with you about the budget cuts. They are typical of today and are necessary. But you don't make big cuts, and then turn around and bring back a high paid vet after firing big fan favorites and expect most fans to understand. It was a big mistake - a big stupid mistake. I have no problems with the ones who were fired. I feel that some of them will be back someday, but why fire them and then bring back another high paid vet who is not needed right now.

I know that many of you don't understand, and you never will. You love the character and the actor and that outweighs it. I loved the old character and he had a place on the show in the past. He doesn't anymore. And if he is part of the show now, I am not.

I will not argue about it or anything. Those are just my feelings, and I have written them to Corday too.

[cal3]

It all comes back to quality. I'm not certain most fans aren't fans of the greater show. The question has become what that show is. It's back to quality and balance and the ensamble. The problem with ABCD is that they no longer have an ensamble. They have one to 4 characters that you must watch. If you don't like them or care about them then you may as well find something else to watch. Same with couples, the problem isn't the breaking up or the keeping together it's the process which tears the individual characters down and often only provides a story/alternative for one of the parts of the couple. Go back to ensamble casts, family and balanced story telling and you put an end to most of the fan based ish.

[EricMontreal22]

Phoenix great post--I'd just add that it's not just people working more (especially women) and having less time but when they are watching tv--even with VCRs and Tivo, they have tons of more options tearing them away from the soaps. It used to be the big three networks were your only serious options in the US (add PBS and a few local stations). I'm only 26 but I can even remember when we only had here in Canada the 13 channels on the dial of our old tv. Byt he early 90s we had close to 30 and now even though I don't subscribe to preminum cable (ie HBO etc) we have about *70* channels to choose from. Add onto that the Internet and the smaller ratings aren't quite as awful as they seem.

I don't want to underplay how bad these current ratings are in any way. HOWEVER..l.. Primetime tv doesn't get the numbers it used to either (the fall hasn't been quite as severe but it sure has been severe--compare viewer numbers for a top 10 hit in the 70s to now)

Back to prevalence of spoilers--exactly even magazines now tell you exactly what date to see what, etc--I remember when I first started getting Soap Opera Digest the previews for the ocming week were MUCH more vague. I think this reliance on hanging out spoilers to the mags and net has infleunced the quality of writing now too--soaps have had big rating stunts (weddings, disasters, etc) since at least trhe Gloria Monty days of GH--and arguably way before. But now more than ever soaps seem to be written around a number of "story points" that will make good spoilers--

E

[PJA]

I think spoilers is a major reason but I think the main reason is cable. Let's be realistic, in the 70's you only had like three channels and now you have over 200. You know ratings are going to decline. I think quality is only a slight reason why ratings have dropped. The only time I think you can blame quality on ratings decline is when that show sees a large decrease while other soaps remain about the same. For example when Days fell or like how ABC soaps are falling while others are remaining the same then I think you can blame quality.

[Canfan]

I think spoilers have hurt but soaps have been gradually losing an audience over the last couple of decades just like primetime has. I just never thought it would get this bad. I think alot of it has to do with the poor writing. The stuff in the ninities was not Shakepeare but I did'nt feel like I was being lectured to or talked down too the way I do currently. I find the ABC soaps the worst for this. I also agree rabid fan bases are not helping. You can't please everybody but at least before I still watched because one or two characters appealed to me or at least one storyline. I agree completely with cal3 on this:

Its the primary reason I left GH years ago and now don't watch AMC. I know its always the same characters with the same redundant dialogue. If I had know that half the characters I hated and half the ones I loved had been on yesterday I would have watched, just to catch Palmer in particular. The problem is I never expect them on and so I have given up watching. I am always willing to come back but only if I can expect some hope. I actually found ATWT's slasher storyline in all his hokey glory more interesting this summer than anything else on tv. And I haven't watched ATWT since David Stenbeck died. But it was a short term gimmick and I probably won't stick around expect maybe for the Luke storyline which I also thought has been very good so far. Especially in contrast to Bianca's treatment over on AMC.

[David V]

Well let's face it- network TV generally, along with commercial radio and newspapers have all lost their audience in the past decade because of the growth in cable TV, Internet, DVDs, mp3s and the like.

[Ilovemydays]

It's the lousy shows to blame! Bad writing and the poor quality of production has prompted AMC to all new lows.

Spoilers should entice the audience to tune in the way a good trailer for a movie will. I can't remember the last time an AMC spoiler made me think, "Oh man I have GOT to see that!" do I blame the spoiler? Nope. It's the show because most of us stood by AMC for MONTHS AND MONTHS with NO pay-off. Heck, some of us feel kicked in the teeth by AMC. How long should a viewer stand by and watch a show that they loved turned to an embarrassment? I waited for a year. Far longer than I should have. I was ignoring what the spoilers said and tuned in hoping that something would be on the show worth watching that wasn't mentioned in a spoiler. There used to be a time when there would be a moment or two a day but the moments disappeared and my favorites are MIA only to be trotted out for 'special' occasions.

So thanks to the current PTB I not only tuned out AMC but I have switched OVER to NBC. I had never crossed over from the ABC daytime lineup before. I went form AMC to DOOL and I'm staying as long as they give me something good to tune in for because AMC isn't offering me anything worth my time.