Jump to content

Some Soaps to Axe Previews to Cut Costs!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Kay Alden touched on this in her MIT talk. She basically said too much stuff was happening. I think like drug use, you keep ramping it up to get the same effect, and eventually blow your brains to smithereens. Kay was clearly talking about more character based plotting, quieter, so that the "cliffhangers" can be more emotional, and truly touching.

What you say, though, suggests to me that these previews are soap-killers. For the model to work, they need to get you to tune in every day, or nearly. And for that to work, you have to WONDER what will happen tomorrow. "Will it be worth my time?". Not having previews (or published spoilers) increases suspense.

But I also agree with you. America no longer has tolerance and patience for ANYTHING that requires daily commitment. If most soap viewers are like you---unwilling to watch 80%--thinking the "buildup" episodes are crap...then soaps cannot survive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If soaps refuse to give me previews I will simply watch soaps from the internet via clips. I know that if Days didn't have the preview showing EJ/Sami on Friday I most likely wouldn't have wanted to watch Days on Monday. More often then not the previews decided weither or not I watch live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If there is absolutely nothing to entice the veiwer to stay tuned why in the blue hell would anyone want to tune in? I don't need to take an hour of my time watching a show that holds no interest or consequence to me. The entire reason the previews work are because of the fact that they promote the show and they show the veiwer what lies ahead next show. With out said promotion one is just left to assume that the same stories will play out the next day. Especially when there is nothing to alert you when something new is going to happen and to watch that day for something interesting to happen. contemporary soaps aren't good television, they are more often then not lack luster and cutting previews isn't going to help at all. If anything it may hurt them more because the audience will not be aware of what is happening or what is going on the next day or if their is even going to be anything of interest for them next episode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Once again, MarkH, I respectfully disagree with you (and I apologize, since we're covering this in another thread, too). If I could, I would amend that statement to say, "America no longer has tolerance and patience for anything bad that requires daily commitment." People want to be entertained, IMO; and they want to be entertained as often as possible. And no, previews (and spoilers) won't make any difference to them if the product is good. Conversely, a show can be the absolute pits, and no amount of "teasing" is going to persuade the audience to think differently.

Exactly, lol. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, how nicely put!! Respectful disagreement is the best kind! What a nice place this is! (One or two forget the "respect" part, but they're the ignorable minority).

What you describe is an empirical question.

I'd love to know, for other daily shows (including "The Daily Show", but also Oprah, Wheel of Fortune, etc.) two things:

a. How are their audiences faring? I think I read Oprah is bleeding out too...but maybe I rhymed that in my own head. I think daily viewership is down across the board. AND, if you could get a survey (these are surely being done, but I have no access to them), you'd find NONE of these shows are really watched 5 days a week any more. Of course, for Oprah and Wheel, it doesn't matter if you miss a show.

b. Of the residual audiences, are they aging? I'm willing to bet that as the audiences shrink, the LOYAL audiences are the oldest viewers. (Advertisers cringe again!).

Put that all together, and it says that "daily loyalty" is an old person's habit. I don't think that folks in their 20s and 30s are watching ANYTHING every day. I just don't believe it.

But I would LOVE to be proven wrong. I totally support your experiment...can we make it happen with quality?

(I'd say OLTL is the current test...and I have no optimism anything is going to improve ratings-wise or demographically for OLTL).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As far as Oprah, I wouldn't include her in any analysis as she turned people off with her foray into politics this year. Not doubt that does not account for all of her losses, but that did contribute.

Wheel is always trying to add something new, (the mini-wheel in the bonus round several years ago, all of those new categories, etc) but I don't think that really changes anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

:lol:

No, you're right: "Oprah" is down seventeen percent. Now, some of that decline might be due to cable and internet; I won't deny that these two have given network and syndicated television shows stiff competition. OTOH, where "Oprah" is concerned, I think it's just a matter of over-saturation. People, IOW, are just plain sick of Oprah, lol. There isn't a corner of this "media-sphere" that isn't "touched by Oprah," quite frankly. (I'd also argue, alot of folks aren't all that interested in watching her, sitting atop her couch, discussing celebrities' fabulous (read: boring) lives, but that's probably neither here nor there, lol.)

But isn't that type of loyalty (meaning, "daily loyalty") kinda-sorta what we're looking for, lol? Let's put it this way: if I were Les Moonves, let's say, or even Babs Bloom, I would want the most "repeat customers" I could find, because they stand to be exposed the most to whatever products my network has to advertise in order to stay financially solvent. Fairweather viewers, who might be there, and who might not...? Well, that's just too dicey, lol.

Oh, well, if OLTL is the "test," then we might as well call the experiment a failure. Two reasons, too, with one feeding the other: 1) Brian Frons, and 2) a lack of a serious promotional push (something along the lines of the old "Love in the Afternoon" campaign) for the show. What good is beating the drums for OLTL when right there, in the middle of Times Square, stands a billboard for a new nighttime show that has flopped already on Canadian television, but is being treated as the Second Coming of SoapNet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I dont. I actually like to watch all the soaps because i love this genre. and i honestly do have too much of a social life and like to sleep to much to watch 8 hours of soaps a day. So i watch the ones i find great everyday (right now days and oltl) and the ones i like most of the time (right now yr and atwt) and the rest here and there. but if im home watching live i always manage to watch the next time for every soap. but say i catch a soap or summen and the previews for tomorrow look good i will def dvr it and watch. without it ill just randomly watch.

im curious as too the Jack Peyton axiom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not talking about dying to tune in tomorrow because of what today's show has given us. I'm talking about tuning in tomorrow because you don't know what tomorrow is going to bring. You yourself said that when you saw a GL preview with Ava, Remy, and Grady, you decided not to tune in. What if you didn't see that preview? What if you had no clue who would be on the following day? Would you just not bother and decide to watch the show every now and then, or would you tune in to see who would be on? Naturally, if you tune in enough and your least favorite characters are on more than the ones you want to see, tuning out would be evident, but would it really make sense to just tune out because you're not going to know what's going to happen?

I've said this before, but I have older relatives who've been watching soaps for ten, twenty, thirty, forty, even fifty years. They're not Internet people or magazine readers in the least, so they watch everyday without knowing what's going to happen, who's going to leave, what characters are returning, etc. They still enjoy the shows as much as they did ages ago. Granted, a big part of that is because they don't take them nearly as seriously as some people do, but that's a completely different topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • When Robert Calhoun became EP I thought GL was finally hitting its stride after some pretty rough years. Unfortunately the ratings during Robert Calhoun's run did not reflect the quality of the show.
    • There was a five week break between the last Friday episode and the Thursday episodes which were the final four episodes. I have a feeling the final four episodes were refilmed to wrap up the storylines. 
    • Yes, I forgot there was a gap between his exit from GL and his start at ATWT. This almost makes me want to cry. He really turned ATWT around (and good for them). It would have been great if someone had done the same for GL. Can't imagine who. The Dobsons were doing Santa Barbara at this point. I mainly blame Kobe. She may not have been the worst EP they ever had, but she almost totally destroyed the Bauers and decimated much of the rest of the cast, sometimes for egotistical reasons. That was a huge mistake and made it that much harder for the show to recover.
    • Douglas Marland began at As the World Turns in September 1985 but it took about a year for his run to show growth in the ratings. 1986 As the World Turns becomes CBS's #2 daytime drama after Y&R.
    • This is not at all surprising. Watching the recently uploaded episodes, the uneveness is SO apparent. Characters are changing at the drop of a hat. The stories are close to incoherent. It's a mess, and we're only up to May. What a fall from grace. An Emmy-winning show with good ratings and within a few short years hitting possible cancelation territory.  I'm surprised CBS and/or P&G didn't try to do SOMETHING to restore its former glory. Was Marland still at ATWT at this point? 
    • I think she did, yes. The only part of that return I remember appreciating was the ripoff they did of Earrings of Madame De, where a secretly broke India sold a trinket and Ross or Alan (I think it was Ross) then bought it for her, not knowing it was hers.
    • 6-4   Getting around to the rewatching and I guess Dani/Bill/Hayley as A story is coming around better to me. I hope that means that I will feel different about Friday's episode which first time around I felt was more of a Wednesday/Thursday episode. Anita's story and Dani/Bill/Hayley (with Kat vs SilkPress being a solid B plot to keep the SilkPress storyline alive, but NOT A story) have been the focus for this past week. So I'm worried I'll feel a way when I get back to Friday's episode. I guess I'm about to find out.   I know I have issues with Dani/Bill/Hayley coming back into focus since the much better paced SilkPress storyline is truly where it's at with so much aftermath/new direction to explore. However, I'm finding that...just like with the story of Martin's secret being slowly woven back into the story narrative...I care a little bit more for it since it's been background since Week 3, Month 1. IMHO the characters...outside of Hayley...have been developed in other plots. The past week and a half has had Dani and Andre growing closer and they have gotten to the 'third month what are we?' talk that I expect in all relationships in real life. And I liked how the writers have slowly had friction between them to see what they are made of? Is it still just a booty call or can it be more? Meanwhile, Bill has been hiding his physical issues for months. Too busy messing with other people's marriages.

      Please register in order to view this content

          So now that they have some more POV to them, it was good to see an organic...and yes, it was organic...reason for them to be in the same room. In this case...the hospital room. Lord, Karla and Timon have such great chemistry. And Dani and Bill were so acting like exes. No wonder Hayley feels threatened. Oh, well. lol. Bonus...the drama with Bill has Hayley and Naomi back in each other's orbit. They don't have enough scenes together.    You all know I was waiting for Anita's story. So how am I feeling? Pretty good. TT has been playing it to the hilt. And I was not expecting the story of a fourth member who killed themselves after being pushed out. And it's had a build. First through Tracy. And now with Sharon...who is swiftly being established as a piece of work. A Have-Not (if not Has-Been) who is not above scheming. Okay. lol. I liked the conversation between Anita and Vernon where she told him the truth, and he tried to hold her up. Whether she deserved it or not, it was good to see. I'm sure all of the secrets are not out yet so I look forward to more. Cuz we know they are not cancelling the reunion. Which fingers crossed...will be at the police fundraiser.     Honestly, I continued to be impressed with how the writers have kept Silk Press Sheila out of jail, but still playing the beats of it all. She's definitely in covering her tracks mode, and it's great to watch. It's also great to see her mixing it up with different characters. I was happy to get the long-awaited showdown between her and Nosy Nurse and Nosy Nurse READ...HER...DOWN. I was just disappointed Nosy Nurse spilled some tea. And that led to SilkPress's scene with Andre. And then Andre...lord...talked too much.   C plot this episode has been Chelesa's love life. I was wondering where it was going to go after her talk with Vernon. Enter...Mystery Woman. I wonder what her secret would be that would get in her way with Chels. Related to an enemy of the Duprees? Married? I am intrigued. And I do like Chelesa getting the spotlight because daytime does not really do it like how they are doing it with her.    Can Kat and Jacob get a spinoff? lol. 
    • 1986 began with the EP change from Gail Kobe to Joe Willmore and the HW change from Pamela Long to Jeff Ryder. Over the course of 1986 there was turnover in the HW ranks: Jeff Ryder, Jeff Ryder and Mary Ryan Munisteri as co-HWs, Mary Ryan Munisteri and Ellen Barrett as co-HWs, Joseph Manetta, Joseph Manetta and Sheri Anderson as co-HWs. The 1986 ratings reflected the quality of the show. GL was saved from cancel territory in 1986 because Capitol was still CBS's lowest-rated daytime drama.
    • As Michael should be...DARK.   I'm just getting through my first few scenes of Rory as Michael. And I'm already picking up chemistry with LW, EMcCoy, and SMattson from the jump. I liked Rory as Noah on Y&R, but felt it was wasted potential. So far...he's proving me right. 
    • Oh, lord. Those rumors are true, aren't they?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy