Jump to content

November 17-21, 2008


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I am constantly amazed at that mentality. The "loyal soap fan" is somewhat of a mystery. On the one hand they argue, "if you don't like it, don't watch it." Then they argue against programming designed to bring in new viewers, and then the wonder why the ratings are in the toilet.

The only encouraging development I have seen regarding daytime is Sara Biebel's blog about seven-day DVR ratings. Those were good news for many soaps, particularly Y&R and Days. I found it interesting that OLTL is the stinker in the litter. LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

The ratings. Expensive Stunt. Short Bump. All New Low. Crazy Stupid Stunt. Short Bump. All New Low. For years. Etc.

My mentality is you can get new viewers without dumbing down a show and showing disrespect to the audience that's been there for 5-10-20 years. I didn't say the loyal viewers are all that matters, but they should matter more than they do. You can't just look at them and say they're not giving me enough of what I want so let me try to get the MTV audience instead (which save a few shows I would think is deeply declining). You can but it's clearly not working. I'm of the schooling that working off the show's history and relationships and making it richer is the best way to go. Sure that may not get ratings either - I agree with you I don't think soaps will survive another 10 years either way - BUT I rather they die with the dignity that brought me into watching soaps 20 years ago (wow it's been a long time, I'm still in my 20s - not 80 quite yet).

I'm not anti-stunts, yes I know it's been a part of soaps since the beginning especially for sweeps periods. I'm anti plot-driven shows/stunts which is what the bulk of them have been doing for years. Throwing money and flash at the problem instead of throwing thought and respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Let me rephrase: if these so called loyal viewers were getting what they wanted the rest of the year, do you think these so-called stunts would drive them away? Like I said there's nothing new about sweeps stunts. AMC had a tornado 15 years ago. Todd screwed Marty 20 years ago.

I'm not Jess but here's the link: http://thebiz.fancast.com/2008/11/deep_soa...ights.html#more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No, they wouldn't. It may have come out that way, but I of course don't think sweeps-generated stunts are the only problem daytime is facing. Everything from cable to change in the working demographic to declining quality on the soaps are the problem. In terms of quality on the soaps, I happen to think plot-driven writing and disrespect to a show's history in general is one of the bigger problems serials have these days and the big flashy sweeps stunts are like the neon signs of a problem that's there all year long in a less upfront way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You know I don't know why a soap should be run any differently than any other business where the mantra is "Your best customer is an existing customer". Well run businesses nurture and care for these customers while still pursuing new customers. It's business 101.

This all reminds me of my former employer who back when the internet hoopla hit, decided to abandon the business model that made them successful to pursue to cool and up and coming internet business. Problem was they totally ignored those customers and they left and the internet boom went belly up and ultimately the company went bankrupt and 10,000 people out of work;. To this day, 8 years later, those customers they abandoned are still operating and running effectively and took their business to someone else while the internet companies all moved onto someone else sexier and more attractive or went belly up.

Sweeps stunts are great if you have follow-up story in place that builds on the action and stunts planned for sweeps. To me this sweeps for Y&R was the best because the drama surrounding the events have all setup stories on this show for the next 3 to 6 months, keeping people who they got back viewing for sweeps engaged for the long haul.

ABC(barring OLTL) has a history of conductng sweeps and that;s it. The last successful sweeps GH ran was in Feb 2007 and it was a lot of action but once sweeps ended, there was no follow-thru stories to the events that occured therefore they lost viewers and continue to I expect. If you want to win new viewers for the long haul, you have to keep them engaged for the long haul. ABC for the most part fails miserably here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

you can't seriously compare daytime viewers to primetime viewers...there's a difference..longtime daytime viewers are soft. they watch for love in the afternoon and not for the stunts. it's been like that forever since the genre started. whereas hardcore primetime viewers watch because of the action stunts on a constant weekly basis and bash the romance aspect. like sons of anarchy for example. a FX series.. it's very much identical to GH. the woman are your typical ride or die. the men are family oriented criminals. sonny/jason. SOA clay/jacks..except on SOA it's a father and son relationship. where GH sonny/jason it's friendship based. the mother who plays gemma has the distinct personality of carly who's married to clay. kinda reminds you of that sonny/carly era. a mobster and his mob moll. jacks love interest is a liz webber clone. she's a nurse that works by day trying to see her man at night whenever possible..most of all. it's successful. to say that ABC fails because the ratings decrease on behalf of the stunts they do during sweeps is pretty narrow minded. you have to look at the facts that everyone who watches soaps are not totally into violence so they tune out oppose to the primetime fanbase who love it. ask 100% of people in the daytime world. the results wont be too surprising. then go over to the primetime forums and ask them do they prefer more romance or violence..i mean i understand that alienating viewers is not a good idea. but like karren harris said in her interview. when ratings are low. things change. sometime for the positive sometimes for the negative. your not gonna please everyone taht's not fans of certain aspects. Y&R seems to be on the higher ground cause is caters to the soap genre audience. it's as simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No, there is nothing wrong with pursuing new viewers. From the 50s to the 80s, those new viewers were recruited within the family. Mothers passed the habit--and particular stories--to their offspring.

That trend was broken in the 70s, and reached the current steady rate of viewer loss around 1980. Since then, soaps have been declining (at a fabulously constant rate--no "OJ Effect" and no accelerated decline in recent years). I've realized there is another dimension to the decline that I haven't written about...but I'll save that for another day.

Interestingly, around the time that the negative trend doubled remained constant (1980, give or take), Gloria Monty came to GH. Now, Monty's GH is an interesting case. I have now very carefully studied GH ratings in the late 1970s, and there was a remarkable decline over a short number of years. Viewers were actively turning off the show...so it went from near the top of the rankings to near the bottom.

Monty won new viewers! And she did it in a new way...what you might call "primetime buzz". Incredibly paced, exciting, completely unique stories (I realize that her writers like Marland, Falken Smith, and Racina get credit too), engaging young performers. Her buzz was built in the dorm room, via promotion, and on the covers of major newsmagazines.

But the Monty experiment is fascinating for what it DID NOT do. A scant 8 years later, GH had lost the top spot on the ratings, and its rate of decline was actually faster than most other soaps through the 80s. Since about 1989, GH has declined at the same rate as every other show.

In other words, the Monty strategy to gaining new viewers (not intergenerational, but via buzz and social networking) worked...but it was not as long-lasting as the traditional intergenerational route. In other words, if you're trying to build an audience that will hang on for decades (and I realize this is an arguable goal), Monty's approach is actually not the way to do it.

See how the recent return of Genie Francis had NO effect on ratings. That is because, among other things, the viewers who watched for Genie were not building a lifelong intergenerational habit. They were just tuning in for a short-term college-aged fad.

The implication of my foregoing section is in DIRECT agreement with Angela. Stunts usually dumb down a show. And traditional viewers (the loyal base thaqt sustains a show between sweeps) get really upset about that.

I think you might be somewhat influenced by an ABC bias. (I seem to recall you were an ABC girl??).

See, on Y&R and B&B, certainly up till Bill Bell's demise, I really couldn't tell when it was a sweeps month. So, again, I find myself in agreement with Angela.

If well done, a soap is a LARGELY self-maintaining engine, with viewers dragged along by loyalty and habit (Kay Alden said that, and she was right). You do have to give them flashes of excitement, and those flashes could surely be timed for November/February-March/May...but the flashes should be organic to the ongoing story. In other words, rather than "stunts" followed by maintenance boredom, the better formula is "payoff" (rewarding you for the last four months of buildup of suspense and tension), and "follow-through/consequences". That is how you keep your audience on the boat.

But, of course, the flaw in what I just wrote is that the ratings are NOT self-maintaining. Shows have been shedding viewers at that constant rate since 1980. Part of that trend is death and defection of loyalists, but the other half is non-replacement.

Now, here it gets complicated. Our demographics have changed...there will be no more intergenerational replacement. But, as Gloria Monty's experiment showed, other ways of gaining viewers will not give you a long-term sustainable audience...it will give short term viewership.

What that means, I think, is something we have discussed previously. For the new world, we must stop with the 70 year old shows...and build 5-year shows (or less) that capture the reality of how long you can realistically sustain an audience in the current climate.

The soap opera is supported mainly by folks who have been watching for years (regardless of how good or bad), and will continue to do so. That is the reality.

Luring new viewers is a very tricky thing. How do you make the soap interesting to people who don't know the backstory, and are intimidated by it? The answer is to create newbies with no backstory...or ignore backstory. But that is the VERY thing that p*sses off the loyalists, and provokes their defection.

It is no-win.

The only solution, IMO, is "replacement soaps". It used to be that new soaps were introduced often. From the 50s to the 80s, there were new soaps (often multiples) annually or every few years. Most of them never caught on. But the point is that, like primetime, the networks were constantly trying for the next big thing.

Also, they regularly retired chestnuts (Secret Storm; Love of Life) in favor of new shows. They realized you had to build new shows for new audiences. Y&R was a direct attempt to build a new, younger audience.

The real death of the soap industry came when we stopped doing that. (I mean, we tried...Sunset Beach, Passions, Santa Barbara, Port Charles, The City) But the rate of replacement got slower...and now it has dried up. We're no longer doing what, for the main, used to be essential....regularly retiring old soaps (Irna Phillips said she needed to retire soaps--even at the top of their game--if their logic was "saturated")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's all I'm saying. Existing customers are a base but you have to cultivate new ones if for no other reason than to replace those who move or die. Even the tobacco industry had enough sense to pursue "replacement smokers" and their customers were physically addicted to their product.

I don't understand why OLTL gets a pass on this. Marty begging her rapist to screw her was the Pulp Fiction of soap.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The more tempermental me would have given you the bitch eye for narrow minded, lol. I guess that's the way my comments came out because you weren't the first to go there but I definitely wasn't putting the state of daytime all on sweeps stunts. I explained that in more detail in the post prior to this. My emphasis was on sweeps stunts (and how they've been done say in the past 5 years or more) because they're what I feel is the hallmark of what the soaps are now doing wrong most of the year albeit in a more dulled way.

I agree. If you're not good at engaging the old viewers for the most part and you can't engage the new viewers for long at all, it's a huge problem and it is indeed a huge problem because most of the soaps have no concept of how to do either anymore. It's a mess.

Thank you ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Sweeps stunts are great if you have follow-up story in place that builds on the action and stunts planned for sweeps. To me this sweeps for Y&R was the best because the drama surrounding the events have all setup stories on this show for the next 3 to 6 months, keeping people who they got back viewing for sweeps engaged for the long haul.

Y&R and OLTL are the soaps I watch everyday, and OLTL's stories (despite their controversial elements) also set up longterm stories and ramifications. I still find the show completely excellent- granted we are just out of sweeps...

I think OLTL needs to continue to establish its niche in daytime as an edgy, contemporary show. Its very different from any other show right now, and it is just as good as Y&R with treating its vets with respect.

Y&R is classic, old fashioned soap opera and I love, love, love it.

And OLTL better figure out a way to get those DVR people watching. I'm not watching this show drop to the bottom once GL is canceled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You are right about that. So if CBS handles sweeps differently then I defer to that. I can't tell you what I would pay to punch Frons in the junk.

The only part of this death pool that leaves me sad is the fact that no one will try their hand at a new soap. I would be so willing to give a new soap a chance, provided it was truly a product of the modern era. One of the things I resent about all this talk of saving "the genre" is that when people say the genre they just mean their favorite show. The genre should be about more than these anemic leftovers. Star Trek was off the air for 30 years. That didn't mean the GENRE of science fiction ceased to exist.

Unfortunately serialized drama is in a difficult state right now. Just ask Tim Kring. And even though Kring has (rightfully) spent the last week apologizing for his unfortunate remarks, (Note to Kring: it's never a good idea to say the word "dipshits" into a microphone) I challenge anyone to say he was wrong. In the meantime, I'm going to keep my eye on he web.

I love comedy and the web - and Eden Riegel - gave me Imaginary Bitches.

I love musical and the web - and Joss Whedon - gave me Dr. Horrible.

So I'm going to hold out for a web drama. (Are you listening Michael Malone?!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh Marceline- you are one of my fave posters despite the fact that I never agree with anything you say! :) the rest of OLTL was compelling too. And the show has been excellent since Marty "begged her rapist to screw her"...with some of the best acting I have seen in years.

I am finished with apologizing regarding this storyline. It was brilliantly acted, executed, and written.

Offensive? Yes. Life is offensive. Marty has not even begun to get her revenge on Todd. Todd is a pathetic rapist and villian who deserves everything he has coming to him.

As far as stunts-GH is a horribly lit and plot driven bore. Stunt after stunt after stunt after explosion after gunshot after stunt. Yet GH is ABC's "crown jewel"... Blech. Sorry people it is not 1981. GH has not been excellent since the 90's.

Wonder who will win the emmy next year? GH!! YUP. They will probably submit one their sweep "Lets get that emmy even though we don't deserve it" show featuring special effects, ect... Will emmy voters appreciate Y&R's brilliance? or even OLTL's for that matter?

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

    • Tamara Tunie was on a local CBS affiliate in Baltimore the other day talking about a few things she had going on, BTG amongst them: "Beyond the Gates" star Tamara Tunie is in Baltimore for the Reginald F. Lewis Museum's 20th anniversary
    • Kobe/Long had their own template and pretty much gutted the cast. As soon as contracts were up established characters were dropped. They needed to free the budget for the new characters. Going back to Ann,I wonder why the Dobsons renewed her contract around 78? After her initial story she became supporting and they didn't seem to want to pursue a romance with Mike. Maybe the feedback was that viewers blamed her indirectly for Leslie's death. If Mike hadn't taken on her case etc. Did she decide not to disrupt her son's life? Seems odd after everything she didn't claim him back. 1976 continues... Joe Werner is just not bouncing back after his recovery as he should, and Sarah, concerned about his sometimes morbid-seeming depression, consults Justin Marler. They agree that Joe is becoming a “cardiac cripple,” and know this kind of overcompensation for illness and overprecaution can not only be a permanently depressed condition but can actually cause a setback for him physically.  Marler releases Joe into Sarah’s care, but it’s soon apparent that just being out of the hospital hasn’t done anything to boost Joe’s spirits about his return to a normal existence. Marler finally lays it out to Joe—the choice has to be his. He can choose to lead a normal, productive life as a doctor and as a husband to the best wife he could have, or he can choose to become an invalid and live on the outside looking in for the rest of his days, sentencing Sarah to the same fate. Realizing the selfishness of what he’s doing to —Sarah as well as the narrowness of the confinement he’s set for himself, Joe begins to see his preoccupation with his illness as the self-pity it really is and decides he’s ready to return to the hospital for a one hour shift each day. Sarah is overjoyed by his turnabout, but full happiness is hers on the day she overhears Joe telling a fearful patient that the world is beautiful and worth any. effort to get back into it. Steve and Adam are thrilled to learn that Cedars has been the recipient of the Levy Grant for expansion of hospital property. But they have learned, as they report to Ed, that the land they were hoping to build the new research facility on, the land immediately adjacent to the hospital, has been purchased by Dr. Justin Marler. Both Adam and Steve feel that Justin is expanding a power base at Cedars and the land purchase is just one more block in Justin’s power play. When Ed asks Marler why he purchased this particular parcel of land, Marler explains that he bought it with the express intention of someday building his own offices and facilities convenient to the major facilities of Cedars. When the subject of the hospital’s needing the land arises, Marler meets with Adam, and they agree that he should realize a fair profit from his property and that an unbiased assessor should be engaged to evaluate the market value of the land so they can agree on a selling price. When Sarah comments on the fact that Marler is to realize a profit on the land, he bitterly replies that no matter what he’s done since coming to Cedars to prove that he has changed. since she last knew him, she refuses to see him as anything but what he was all those years ago. Sarah insists this isn’t true. But Marler then calls Adam for a meeting and informs him that the land is not for sale at any price. As Adam begins to grow alarmed, Marler continues that the site for the new building will be his personal donation to the hospital. As Adam expresses profuse thanks and appreciation, Marler wryly notes that the tax deductions he’ll realize on this contribution to a charitable institution will benefit himself almost as much as Cedars. When Steve Jackson learns that Marler is to be elected head of the research wing that will be built on his property, he expresses the conviction that this was the exact intention of the gift. Adam, however, assures Steve that the donation wasn’t a factor in the hospital  board’s decision, they were concerned only with Dr. Marler’s reputation as a doctor. | After lengthy consultations and meetings. with the hospital  staff, Ed assured by the head nurse that her nurses performed commendably despite the added pressure of the train wreck, presents his findings to the hospital review board. Steve arrives at two possible explanations for the facts. Either Grainger, more active than usual due to the previously delayed medication, reached for the writing pad and inadvertently disconnected the breathing tubes, or he was in a state of extreme upset because of the delayed medication and.in the excitement a surge of adrenalin within his system caused his brain aneurism to start hemorrhaging. " Upon learning that the review board has ruled out negligence in Grainger’s death, Ed tells Rita, who takes her first free breath in a long time. But Ed hasn’t thought to tell Rita that he’s been in touch with Grainger’s attorney, Mr. Schafer, who, knowing that a woman was at the base of Grainger’s investigation, is coming to Springfield to try to find out who the woman - was who walked out on Grainger when he collapsed —in the restaurant. Peggy, learning that Rita’s “forgetting” to deliver Holly’s message was instrumental in their divorce ‘being finalized, tells Ed that Holly wanted to reach him to stop the divorce. Immediately after, Peggy is torn by doubts, wondering if she did the right thing.She confides in Barbara, who then discusses the situation with Ed. He tells her he and Holly have discovered a new closeness now that they are building their separate lives. Barbara quickly contradicts him: Holly is not building a new life. Barbara gently cautions Ed, saying, “People change, feelings change, and what seems right now may not be right a year from now. No decision is irrevocable.” Ed agrees with this. Now that Ben has declared his love for her, Hope finds herself apprehensive, fearing that she might be making a mistake, as she did a few years ago, when she was sure she was in love with her college professor. Explaining that she doesn’t want to make another mistake, she asks Ben to be patient, and he agrees. When Mike expresses his disapproval of Ben’s overstated independence, his need to be beholden to no one, Hope quickly jumps to Ben’s defense, and Mike apologizes. But Ben, surprisingly, accepts Mike’s assessment as constructive criticism. Later Hope, examining her feelings and desires, tells Ben she does love him and wants to belong to him. Later that evening, after they’ve made love, Ben asks Hope to marry him.And, delighted, she replies that she will. At Hope’s instigation, Bert has a family dinner to which Ben is invited, and Hope announces their intention to marry over glasses of wine. Mike politely offers best wishes while Bert thrills the couple with her offer to' make a Christmas wedding for them. Bert later tells Mike he must accept this engagement with good spirits for Hope, and later, seeing the joy she’s feeling, he gives his daughter his approval. But Ben finds another problem on his very own doorstep: his brother Jerry, who announces he’s left home after several bad fights with their parents. He refuses to tell Ben what they were fighting about. As Ben is showering, Jerry borrows his car and goes out for an hour. The phone rings, but Ben can’t hear it. Shortly after, two uniformed officers visit Mike at home to tell him that his late wife’s car has been involved in a delicatessen robbery earlier in the evening. Since Ben bought Leslie’s car, Mike accompanies the officers to Ben’s apartment. Ben curtly informs the police that he had nothing to do with the robbery and makes it clear that he feels they wouldn’t be there if he didn’t have a record and that his exoneration doesn’t prevent his being hassled like any ex-con,as they tell him he has to go to the police station for questioning. Hope tells Ben she called him earlier, and when he replies that he must have been in the shower, she accepts his word unhesitatingly.Jerry finally returns to Ben’s place and under questioning from Ben admits that he robbed the store,explaining that he has debts. Ben is now in a quandary,as he feels he must protect his brother but doesn’t want to be unfair to Hope. He tries to ease the situation by withdrawing $185 from the joint checking account he opened with Hope and repaying the delicatessen owner. He then sends Jerry out of town to stay with a friend. His relief at having solved the problem is short-lived, however, when Mike informs him that, despite the reparations, the robbery was a felony and the police will continue to investigate. Hope is badly upset to learn while making a deposit that Ben withdrew’a sum which Mike tells her is equal to the amount stolen. This shakes her belief that he _was really home when she called, and she goes to him, asking for an answer to put her mind at rest. Ben can’t betray Jerry and asks Hope to trust him, promising she will have the whole story eventually. But Hope can’t accept this; she needs complete honesty and openness in her relationship and without it cannot goon. She painfully tells her father that the wedding is off despite her love for Ben, and tells Bert to stop preparations. Mike goes to Ben, reminding him that half the money in the account is Hope’s and she has the right to an answer. But Ben won’t say any more and refuses Mike’s offer to represent him legally, again stating that he doesn’t need a lawyer, because he’s done nothing wrong.     
    • And not since. I recall it was quite small for a house that size. And I don't know why you would walk down a narrow corridor to get to the main living area. I hate when the sets on soaps don't have a logical layout! As for Andre his clothing is fashion forward and suitable for his character.He ain't gonna wear no blazer!
    • The last I remember seeing Ben, he was divorcing Amanda. He came to tell Evie that he still loved her, but was leaving town so that Amanda wouldn't blame Evie for his divorcing her. I'm not exactly sure when, but Evie doesn't leave town until sometime after Nola and Quint's engagement ball. I'm not sure if she leaves before or after Justin leaves in Sept(?) of '83. I grew to like Helena when she became friends with Vanessa, once she's edging her way out of Quint's life.
    • Please register in order to view this content

    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • It sure was!  With respect, how does that make sense?  These men are young, I don't see that. 
    • I hope this played better than it sounds, because I'm imagining two separate scenes (the attack by Arnie, and later Charles getting shot). In my mind, it should have been a fluid single sequence. I wonder if or how often "bastard" was uttered in this scene. Fare thee well, Christopher Reeve. I've said it before, but pop culture's gain was daytime's definite loss. Imagine seeing HIM day after day, year after year, decade after decade, conceivably until they stopped producing soaps in NYC.   Well, that answers my "bastard" question. Good lord, the roads of Rosehill are packed with high-strung drivers and/or pedestrians. More sequences that I hope played better than they sound.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I think Ben had already left while under Marland and only returned briefly to reconcile with Eve. The whole thing confuses me as I thought for a long time that Eve left the show to go be with him and that was when they reconciled, but it seems like he returned, they got back together, then he left and maybe they were still together until she left to join him? I have no idea.  It does seem like the interim writers were using some characters like Justin and Helena who were quickly dumped under Kobe/Long, which is a shame. Helena is one of those characters who likely always had a shelf life but Rose Alaio was such a vibrant screen presence, if Kobe/Long had just been patient, she likely would have fit in well in the Reva era.
    • Also, the lawsuit story was not the right story to bring Naomi and Bill into a court battle since those types of lawsuits are usually resolved via settlements.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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