Nelson's Interview With Maria Arena Bell and Paul Rauch

[DaytimeFan]

Excellent interview. MAB is a gutsy lady, she gets the show and loves the show. Paul Rauch is an old pro, I'm delighted with both of them.

And MarkH, glad you noticed the connection between my information and MAB's attitude to Babs.

[Jess]

That was an interesting read.

As far as Nelson, he certainly is given to what President-elect Obama would call "rhetorical flourish."

[Y&RWorldTurner]

I just picked up on her subtle Grifith jab. LOL!

When she talked about how Paul makes the material "perfectly [realized] onscreen." She also mentioned his "experience," something Griffith clearly didn't have. You can really tell how much she hates Bloom and Griffith. LOL!

[Heyou]

She could make a few more knee-jerk corrections and work quicker on some of the infamous hair models as Nelson so bluntly always points out. *Cough* Sursok *Cough*

[marceline]

I think Nelson only has two settings: "fawning sycophant" and "scorned bitch."

[dragonflies]

[DaytimeFan]

STING!

True though.

[Cashton]

I've always liked Nelson and still do. His writing though is so uneven. He reads too many boards! I wish we could have more seasoned journalists in the soap world. As much as I like him, some of his columns read like a 13-year old girl blogging about Gossip Girl.

That aside, the actual interview was good. Glad that they're going to re-do the opening credits, wished he would have followed up and said "when!<". The biggest revelation is that it's clear Bell is in charge and she's taking credit for guiding the ship to where it is now. it's almost absurd to imagine any any soap EP taking credit for the state of their show, but she does. She wasn't arrogant, but she's clearly proud of Y&R and wants people to know it's her vision that we're seeing onscreen. Pretty cool...and pretty risky! if Y&R's quality ever goes down she will be the central focus of the criticism a la Latham.

There's always been a degree of confusion on the boards as to whom to give credit to - Bell, HS or PR but she's placed the responsiblity on her shoulders. Quite a move!

[JackPeyton]

im just gonna go on a renadom rant about ratings.

i wish people would get over that DVR ratings are not included. they shouldnt be!

as an ad exec i wouldnt care about how many more people DVR the show only to FF by the 30 seconds im paying for to show them my stuff.

end of rant.

[DaytimeFan]

Oh but JackPeyton, the DVR numbers matter for a different reason. When ad execs see the VOLUME of viewers watching Y&R on broadcast, DVR and Online they can assess not only how their ads will play between segments...but the value of product placement WITHIN the show. People using DVR's don't FF the actual show. Thus, a little product placement pimps out the bottom line.

[JackPeyton]

if i was doing a little product placement id look at it.

if im just buying commercial time and commercial time only? then i dont want to even hear about dvr numbers.

but thats just me.

[sheilaforever]

Even though in case of Y&R it's often in-house-promotion. Those VAIO laptops coincidentally getting some favorable camera lighting - anyone?

But nothing as striking as product placement on HOUSE MD. One should think that a show with such sh*tty budget (IMO nearly all TV shows filmed at Universal studios have a crappy look) shouldn't be striping for so much indirect ad cash but oh well, it's NBC produced.

But this is OT.

I think soaps should do much more product placement: Heck, it's their origin. If a a little talk about e.g. Kay getting an IPod would mean extra cash for Y&R and hence giving them an option to pay for certain actors, they should go for it.

EDIT: Those online ads are probably the only time I get in contact with commercials anymore. As soon as I watch some straming episodes I'm always surprised by these new (I'm sure they aren't) ads... They are short and not too inconvenient. I watch less than 5% live on TV, bascially only news anymore. So...

[MarkH]

If I am buying commercial time on a broadcast network, or I am a broadcast network, I agree...I only care about live views.

But , if I am creating/writing a soap, and I want to show that there is viability--a MARKET (even if it is untapped)--I am going to point everyone to Soapnet and online streaming. I'm going to hope that because I 'built it' (i.e., created a sizeable audience in non-traditional venues) that "they will come" (meaning both eyeballs--exquisitely young, affluent, and well-educated, I might add--and the advertisers lured by a new business model).

The time is nigh, I feel, as soon as the current economic slump is over, to convince Madison Avenue to go full force into the new media.

With NBC owning Hulu, and CBS owning (and improving) TV.com...the future of "broadcast" is clearly "broadband"...and it is coming SOON. CBS is the only network, right now, positioned to capitalize on this with their whole daytime lineup.

That is one of the many mystery questions regarding GL. How much ad revenue is GL bringing in via streaming? I suspect it is trivial...but given GL's low budget...maybe not?

[y&r_fan]

Hallelujah!

Did you ever consider that maybe they are keeping Sursok because she's NOT a hair model?

AMEN!

[Jonathan]

Yes, VAIO is made by Sony. Sony distributes the show. Nice synergy.

You're right. Soaps is where product placement first began. Isn't that why they're called soap operas, because some character was pimping Palmolive back in the day?