There is no point to this. Just another round of PASSIONS b!tching and bashing.

I wouldn't call 8 years being on the air a failure, I mean comparing the longevity to the these other soaps.

PC - 6 years

SuBe - 3 years

Generations - 3 years

The City - 2 years

As far as the HH ratings, of course the AW's 1999 ratings are going to be higher than PSNS 00-07 ratings, all soaps had higher ratings back then.

In the 18-49 demos, Passions reached 4th place, something that PC, SuBe, GEN, TC, and I'm pretty sure AW too, never did. None of those soaps also never had 18-34 demo success and 12-17 demo success. Also, Passions consistenly started to beat ATWT and GL in the 18-49 demos, something that AW, SuBe, PC, GEN, TC never did.

In it's second year on the air, PSNS started to consisteinly beat PC in HHs and 18-49 demos.

PSNS 2000 HH Average: 2.1

PC 2000 HH Average: 2.0

PSNS 2000 18-49 Average: 1.6

PC 2000 18-49 Average: 1.3

So while Passions never had huge success in HHs, it did pretty okay for a soap that premiered in the 90's.

Also, Passions lasted longer than anyone ever expected. Seriously, who would've thought the show would last 8 years? A lot of people were saying that it would only last 2 years.

So to everyone who keeps on bashing it, go ahead. You have a right to express your opinion.

To some it's a failure or a bad soap opera with bad writing and bad acting, but to me it's a show that I loved from the very first episode and I will continue to love until the very last episode.

Toups - always will be a Passions fan.

Right on, Toups!

Toups, I was comparing AW's 1999 ratings with Passions' 1999 ratings (and not the soap's current ratings). Please go back to my first post to verify this yourself.

And, to whoever said that AW got a 2.2 is wrong. AW's worst ever weekly rating was a 2.4.

And, to whoever said that AW got a 2.2 is wrong. AW's worst ever weekly rating was a 2.4.

You're wrong on this one, Max.

AW got a 2.2 HH rating for the week March 15-19, April 5-9, April 26-30 in 1999. For the week May 4-8, June 15-19, October 5-9 in 1998.

How long has it been since AW was canelled?

Max, I think you're splitting hairs to call some statements "falsehoods" that seem to me to be just differences in opinion or differences in interpretation.

Also, Toups is right, AW did get a 2.2 some weeks. I vividly recall this because as a fan, I was following the ratings closely at the time. But 2.2 was its absolute all-time low, and most of the time, it was indeed getting ratings that were higher.

Also, P&G did not "cancel" Another World, NBC did. P&G just refused to sell the show to ABC. You can blame P&G for that, but you can also blame ABC for not offering to contract with P&G as opposed to demanding an outright purchase of the show; would that placement of blame mean ABC "cancelled" AW? No, it wouldn't, just as P&G not selling doesn't mean it "cancelled" the show. NBC cancelled AW.

But Max, I do agree with you that any Passions fans who didn't care that AW was cancelled, but are now calling the death of Passions the beginning of the end of daytime, are really missing the forest for the trees. Clearly the death of a longtime institution like AW was much more significant. And yes, there are other larger economic factors at work too.

But at the same time, I also remain optimistic about the future of soaps. I am confident that we'll still be seeing GL in its 75th anniversary year, 2012.

Edited January 19, 200718 yr by jfung79

OK I felt horrible when AW was cancelled but this is not the time to start bringing all that back up.

Passions is leaving us and let the fans mourn it and enjoy it while it lasts. Let's stop beating a dead horse and talking about reasoning, logistics, etc.

This has been a horrible week and stuff like this only makes things worse IMO.

That's exactly what it is. It's beating a dead horse. Give it a rest already. Sheesh...

So, to all the Passions spin doctors, please stop trying to rewrite history. There is nothing you can say or do to deny the ultimate fact: that Passions has been a failure, both artistically and commerically.

8 years for any show, daytime or primetime, isn't exactly a failure, imho. Different strokes, though.

Also, I really don't get the point of 'correcting' the statements of people who are dealing with the loss of a show that a lot of people feel, no pun intended, passionate about. Seriously. Could this not have waited a week or two? I get hating the show, I get being irritated with its very existence and taking joy in its demise. But a lecture? Unnecessary. But again: different strokes.

so, so tired of these debacles...they plague every board....no disrespect to AW fans at all, and not to say that this thread represents all of them anyway, but GET over IT! It happens...I hate that Passions is now defunct(and really has been for several years), but I hope I'm not running around spouting my mouth off years from now about it. Things change my friends....

and I don't want to include those lovely SB posters here that seem to have least moved on....it's one thing to pay tribute, remember, honor, whatev, but c'mon...you're just askin' for stuff to hit the fan with threads like these...

Before I begin the subject at hand, I just want to say that I am not going to deny the obvious: I couldn't be more thrilled about Passions' long overdue cancellation. However, this does not mean that I have no sympathy for what Passions fans are going through, given the fact that I experienced the same feelings eight years ago: Indeed, I do have sympathy for many Passions fans, with the sole exception of those who never gave a rat's ass about AW's cancellation; those people who fall in the latter category are simply not deserving of my sympathy.

Now that my initial thought's about Passions have been stated, I'd like to address something that has been going on amongst Passions fans for much of this week: their attempt to rewrite history. Indeed, in an attempt to justify what a "mistake" Passions' cancellation was, some fans have made statement after statement that simply are not true. Now, I don't believe that these folks are deliberately making false statements in an attempt to rewrite history, cause if that were the case, these people would be lying. Rather, I believe that--because of a combination of ignorance, sadness, and anger--the Passions fans are making such false statements without realizing how wrong they are.

There are so many falsehoods (which is what I will call these statements; since I don't believe that these are outright lies) being made by Passions fans in an attempt to rewrite history. The purpose of this post is to list each of these falsehoods, along with the actual reality of the situation.

Falsehood: NBC is to blame for the cancellation. They did not do everything they could.

Reality: NBC did virtually everything it could to make Passions succeed, from their massive promotional campaigns to forcing its affliates to air the show in the post-DOOL time slot to keeping the show on for eight long years despite terrible ratings. (It should be noted that no other soap in the entire history of NBC was ever given so many opportunites to help it succeed in the ratings. Indeed, virtually all other NBC soaps were treated in the opposite extreme: little promotion, not getting aired on many affiliates, and being cancelled at the drop of a hat anytime there was a ratings problem.) And, for those of you who blame NBC for not firing JERk, you need to keep in mind that--despite the fact that NBC owned the show--the network's contract with JERk likely contained a clause that stated that JERk remain in control of the soap unless he retires or dies. (Therefore, if NBC wanted to fire JERk in an attempt to rescue the soap, they could not have done so without a brutal legal battle.)

Falsehood: JERk is solely responsible for the bad ratings that led to the cancellation.

Reality: Actually, this statement is true for the most part. However, the fact that the word "solely" is inserted into the statement makes it false. Certainly, JERk deserves most of the blame for the soap's bad ratings. However, one of Passions' hallmarks--the terrible acting--cannot be blamed on JERk; clearly the terrible actors themselves made people not want to watch the show. (Well, I guess you could get really technical and say that JERk was to blame because he hired these actors. However, the bottom line is the actors themselves deserve the blame for their horrible performances.)

Falsehood: The Today Show's decision to expand to four hours is the reason why Passions got cancelled.

Reality: Can't you see that this statement is just as faulty as stating that Passions was the reason AW was cancelled? The reason why Passions (or AW back in 1999) was cancelled is because of miserable ratings--plain and simple. The Today Show was merely Passions' replacement (just like Passions was merely AW's replacement back in 1999). Hell, for all we know, NBC may have been wanting to get rid of Passions for many years, yet held on to it solely because the network didn't want to give back an hour of time to the affiliates; since daytime is a dying business, it just so happened that the most profitable replacement for Passions was an extra hour of the Today Show. (The important point to remember in this possible scenario is that NBC may have wanted to cancel Passions long before thinking about adding another hour to the Today show. There's no way to prove that the idea for Passions' cancellation didn't come until after NBC first thought about expanding its morning program.)

Falsehood: Passions' enjoyed critical acclaim.

Reality: This statement would only be true if your definition of "critical acclaim" meant occasional praise from TV Guide (whose Michael Logan has a huge bias in favor of both supernatural storylines and JERk) and Entertainment Weekly. When I talk of critical acclaim, I am referring to the gold standard: The Daytime Emmys. And, here, the fact remains that the show won ZERO Emmys in all the major categories that count. (Yes, I concede that Passions won some technical Emmys, but those categories are very minor.) Furthermore, please don't respond to my opinion by stating that "NBC soaps couldn't win Emmys because the network only has two soaps." This argument is completely bogus, as evidenced by the fact that AW's Charles Keating and Anna Holbrook both won Emmys back in 1996, a year in which NBC only aired two soaps.

Falsehood: Passions outperformed AW in the ratings.

Reality: There were a few weeks in December 2000 when Passions scored a 2.9 rating--which was better than what AW had in 1999. However, keep in mind that there were very few weeks in which Passions received ratings in the high 2's. (And also keep in mind that all soaps did so much better than normal in the ratings during those couple of weeks in December 2000.) For the vast majority of time, AW's ratings in 1999 (which usually ranged from a 2.5 to a 2.7, and never fell below a 2.4) were higher than the ratings Passions got during its first 1.5 years on the air (which usually ranged from a 2.0 to a 2.3). Therefore, on average, there can be no denying that AW had better ratings than Passions.

Falsehood: Passions did so much better than SuBe and PC in the ratings.

Reality: This statement is only partly true. In regards to PC, there are two points to be made: First, PC actually consistently outperformed Passions in the ratings during Passions' first year on the air (while PC never once got better weekly ratings than AW). Second, once PC did finally get lower ratings than Passions, such ratings PC got were only slightly (as opposed to sizably) lower than what Passions had at the time. Now, regarding SuBe, it can be stated that Passions did indeed get sizably better ratings back in 1999. However, the ratings that Passions is getting now are almost as bad--if not just as bad--as what SuBe got when it was cancelled. Most importantly, comparing Passions' ratings to those of SuBe or PC is most definately not an apples to apples comparison: Passions was the beneficiary of massive network promotion and a great time slot (that NBC forced all of its affliates to air it at), while SuBe and PC got little network promotion and were often aired at bizarre times of the day (if the affiliates even bothered to air those soaps at all).

Falsehood: Passions' cancellation is the worst thing to ever happen to daytime.

Reality: Such a belief is completely absurd. If you examine history, the most damaging things that have occurred have been the cancellations of extremely long-running soaps (specifically I am referring to AW, SFT, TEON, and LOL); the loss of such daytime institutions has been a far greater blow than the loss of an 8 year old soap (which, by industry standards, is a relatively short run). Additionally, the deaths of many of daytime's most legendary performers have hurt the genre far more than Passions' cancellation. Furthermore, Passions' cancellation is not even the worst thing to happen to daytime in recent times; rather, that distinction goes to Bob Barker's decision to retire as host of TPIR (something that will cause certain soap's ratings to drop far more than Passions' cancellation).

However, it is just not past history that Passions fans are trying to rewrite. Additionally, an effort is now being made to rewrite "history" before certain events even occur. Take a look at these examples:

Falsehood: Passions' cancellation is the reason why DOOL will likely get cancelled by NBC in 2009.

Reality: The reason why NBC will likely cancel DOOL in 2009 is not because NBC will soon become a one-soap network; rather, the reason for DOOL's impending cancellation is due to the fact that the show just isn't making much (if any) money for NBC, given that that ratings in the mid-2's are not enough to offset the massive costs NBC incurs by broadcasting DOOL. Believe me, if DOOL gets Y&R type ratings come 2009 (which would allow NBC to make a sizable profit off the show), it will have no trouble getting renewed on NBC, regardless of NBC now being a one-soap network.

Falsehood: Passions' cancellation is the reason why ABC will cancel one of its soaps in order to make room for a third hour of Good Morning America.

Reality: This statement would only be true if it read "The Today Show's expansion is the reason why ABC will cancel one of its soaps in order to make room for a third hour of Good Morning America." Again, remember how I already proved that the fourth hour of Today is not the reason Passions got cancelled (it was merely its replacement). Any move by ABC to expand its moring program is merely a reaction to what the Today Show is doing. And, just as importantly, any cancellation of AMC or OLTL is merely a response to the fact that both shows just aren't making ABC much money (which would still be the case if Passions remained). To say that Passions' cancellation is the reason why Good Morning America will expand is to deny this logical conclusion: if The Today Show was expanded to four hours--while Passions was still being kept on the air--ABC would still be considering the option of expanding Good Morning America (and cancelling one of its soaps to make room for it) as a reaction to the The Today Show's expansion.

Falsehood: Passions' cancellaton will be the reason why so many soaps will soon be cancelled, thereby leading to the destruction of the entire genre.

Reality: I've already told you why other factors--and not Passions' cancellation--will cause DOOL, AMC, and OLTL to likely be cancelled. If the other two soaps in danger--GL and ATWT--are cancelled, it will also be because they are not making much money for CBS and P&G. (And both of these soaps would still face cancellation in the near future even if Passions was not cancelled.) It is just simply absurd to think that the cancellation of a short-lived soap (that's the joke of the entire industry) is responsible for the demise of the entire genre.

So, to all the Passions spin doctors, please stop trying to rewrite history. There is nothing you can say or do to deny the ultimate fact: that Passions has been a failure, both artistically and commerically.

Thankfully, Toups told you off.

What a horrible post while this wonderful show's fans are grieving.

And, I'm sorry, but the show was NOT a failure, "artistically and commercially."

THAT's a falsehood for the very reason that the show will have lasted eight years. And DID get all that critical praise (TV Guide, Entertainment Weekly, USA Today, Rolling Stone and several others). Maybe you don't value that kind of praise, but this show struck a CHORD with people in the entertainment industry, including outside of the soaps industry.

I can't count how many times I've laughed my head off at the show's unique antics such as Beth's home with Mrs. Wallace and Precious, the orangutan who, in "Passions" world, REALLY was a medically licensed nursed! lol. And the fact that JER connected that (if you'll recall) to real life situations where people can't afford adequate health care. Stuff like that made the show silly, stupid, entertaining AND relevant.

Last year, yes, the show dipped, creatively, but I can see it rising again. As I watch my tape right now, I see that JER FINALLY is reuniting one of its dynamite couples -- if not romantically, on screen, Julian and Ivy just POP like some of daytime's biggest heavyweights.

I can go on and on about how much I love this show but again, since you're one of those infamous disgruntled AW fans, it will ALWAYS fall on deaf ears.

You'll regard it as a "falsehood."

Well, GET OVER IT.

This is Max's first post since PSNS' cancellation. Stop telling him to stop beating a dead horse. He is stating his opinion a lot more respectfully, maturely, and tactfully than most of us do. I have hated the PRO-AW/ANTI-PSNS threads myself over the years, but he's not breaking the rules so let him the the hell alone.

What is happening to this place?

The only thing Max writes about are these long-winded, tired ass posts about how it's Passions fault for everything in existence, and I'm sure I'm not alone in the fact that he needs to get over the fact that AW was cancelled eight/nine years ago! I swear if he could he'd blame Passions for the ice storm in Texas or the icebergs cracking or the snow in Malibu. It's old, and he needs to think of some new [!@#$%^&*] to say.

Danni is right, King.

he has a history of these posts so I can't blame people for questionins his motives and jumping on him.

It's an emotional and very vulnerable time right now. Everyone is worried about their soaps and Passions fans are in mourning. Everyone reacts differently. Some of us can accept it and are already over it and some are outraged, devestated, and just all over the place. I don't think anything is wrong with SON. It's just a tough time for alot of people and I think we all just need to understand what some are going through and just get through all this as best as possible. This is going to be a time where people just fly off the handle and say things they don't mean or in the wrong context. It's expected. Those of us not going through that will just have to be understanding and not let our own temper fly off the handle.

Things are made worse when people dig at things an d instigate further upset. Max's post as his opinion but his history of posts like these opened him up to questioning and to being jumped on. We don't know if he intended to stir things up but, unfortunately, he has made posts like this before so it's understandable people would react this way.