May 26-30, 2008

[Rocket Man]

OK folks, let's not get our panties in a bunch over Guiding Light's 1.4 rating on Friday. GL was pre-empted on WCBS of New York City due to the coverage of the Crane accident. If it wasn't for the pre-emption GL would've remained at 1.7 or go up at 1.8 for the week.

[SteveFrame]

I am not sure about some of the info there.

For Richer, For Poorer had been cancelled long before 1981.

The 1977-1978 season it was in last place. ATWT was #1 that year.

1978-1979 season - ATWT dropped to 4th

1979-1980 season - ATWT dropped to 6th

1980-1981 season - ATWT was at 5th

1981-1982 season - ATWT tied for 5th with Y&R

So I am not sure where he/she gets ATWT was at the top of the ratings in 1981.

[MarkH]

Demos?

I didn't fact check her. I think what I found more interesting was her take on the youth-grab of GH 1981, and how it changed daytime forever. We can get the specific numbers from the ratings database, if we want. Thanks all for introducing these caveats.

[LoyaltoAMC]

No way ATWT was at the top of the ratings in 1981. It began a steady decline in 1977 after 20 years at #1. GH was firmly at top, followed by AMC and OLTL in 1981. The only CBS show to begin to challenge ABC's dominance was GL around 83/84 with some very popular stories. I think it even hit #1 one week. Then, of course, Y&R began showing growth and would eventually take over the top spot. Week by week circa 1979-1983, ABC dominated the top 3 spots, with ATWT further down the rung.

[Kwing42]

From P&G

They "Claim" they are working hard to put together a quality show.

Um ok.

[Snark]

If you read the actual entry, she's talking about ratings circa 1978, not 1981. MarkH did some bad editing on the part he quoted.

[JackPeyton]

I agree with everything.

I bolded some just to mmake it stand out

[JackPeyton]

I am another one of those that doesnt think whow as on one what day and what story line it was matters much to the ratings (aside from events). i think its much more simple.

people watch when theyw ant and done when they dont. nothing keeps them tuned ine evryday. thats why soaps go up and down so much week to week and day to day.

sure quality matters, and toi ane xtent whos on, but only a small extent.

[JackPeyton]

If i said i couldn't agree more with BOTH posts would anyone understand? Because i do. And idk how because they are the total opposite of each other.. but hey.. ITA with both!

[Ryan]

I'm one of those that firmly believe one couple does not make or break the ratings. It's funny how when ratings go up, fans of said couple will credit them, but when they go down (and said couple is on all the time), then it's someone else's fault. You can't have it both ways.

AMC's ratings going up last week was attributed to 3 reasons....

1) Proper Promotion - ABC ran promos touting this story and it worked.

2) Proper Build - You knew this was coming sooner than later, and it worked

3) Good writing & balancs

[Ann_SS]

I agree, Ryan. The only thing I will add is that sometimes a show suffer when it isn't balanced and one character or couple is given too airtime. This is on the headwriter not the character(s).

[TC]

When my little friend named paranoia (also known as conspiracy theorist) kicks in, he tells me Brian Frons forced AMC and OLTL to delay the best parts of their big reveals 'til after sweeps to keep their revenues a safe distance lower than GH's.

[TC]

I suspect it's on the network big cheese as well. (looking askance at you know who)

[Ryan]

It's no secret Brian Frons has his pets.....

[TC]

Yeah. But I wonder to what extent it influences airtime. I suspect heavily, and by that I mean there must have been times he's told whatever writer that there was a guaranteed saturation level for whatever character, right down to required minutes of airtime. No way of knowing for sure, and maybe I'm just paranoid