December 8-12, 2008

[Soapsuds]

I hear GL needs to achieve a 1.9 to stay alive. If not it is a goner next year.

[jfung79]

Oh no! Where did you hear that? If 1.9 is the cancellation standard, several more soaps could fall under that next year ... 2.0 during December isn't that encouraging for staying above 1.9 by April or May.

[Soapsuds]

It was in an article online I read. It said P&G wanted GL to have at least a 1.9. I think it was P&G and not CBS who commented. I could be wrong though. But I know the exact number is 1.9. As for NBC Days or ABC ...I dont know there standards for staying on air.

[BlueLick]

I think the standard is in the low 1s, but it could change every year. Its more about the demos than it is the household rating or viewership numbers. There's not one soap on the air doing under 0.9 in the main demo.

The soaps are still relatively healthy right now as they're doing better numbers than most programs in syndication so the networks will stick with them for now. Plus advertisers can only find women viewers like this through soaps.

I think if the soaps were to die within the next five years then DOOL would've been gone by March, but it didn't happen and its still around through fall 2010. GL just needs some tweaking when they do their next contract negotiations.

Like somebody said before if GL goes then ATWT goes too. I think CBS will takeover ownership of GL before it ever gets canceled like ABC has with their soaps. That's been the talk with CBS and P&G. The next contract negotiations will be an interesting one and its going to tell you how long the soaps will stay around.

Another great column here TMOTVSoaps. I really like how you broke down each soap in detail. I do agree with you on the DAYS situation on NBC. I think they should think about opening that hour after DAYS back up and bring back Another World. AW would easily do what DAYS is doing now there.

[marceline]

Must it be AW? If NBC were going to go back into soaps I can't see where digging up the dead makes sense. There are so many of us out here who would love to give a new show a try. Something with a diverse mix of characters. And not just racial diversity but diversity in religion, age, sexual orientation and socioeconomic status. And get rid of the fake midwestern towns that just so happen to be home to a Fortune 500 company, a fashion magazine and a cable network that broadcasts only one show. Find a real city. Do a little research and a few location shoots. Baltimore worked for Homicide and The Wire. And, yes, three days a week would be fine. Take a freaking risk.

Or maybe just do another judge show.

[Jess]

I agree with this. The existing shows just continue to recycle the same ol stories. Why not try something different. It could not be any bigger a flop than what is on the air right now.

[MarkH]

With a new show, fresh start, even GL's "production model" (sorry--I don't know a better term R. Sinclair/Brimike) could work beautifully. I just blogged about that actually, because I think GL's production model is not unlike Cloverfield, Blair Witch, The Office, or Friday Night Lights. In each of those shows, the camera works excellently to give us a you-are-there feeling. When you couple that with a limited perspective (the camera simulates what a person sees, rather than an omniscient perspective) it can work excellently to create a feeling of intimacy and tension/anxiety.

I think to reformat the narrative to fit GL's camera/sound style requires too much of a stretch from classic GL. But the exact same techniques with a new "high adrenaline" soap could work brilliantly.

It would actually be the biggest sign of the health of the genre if...as was true until this decade...cancellation didn't mean death, but rebirth. When an old soap died, it was replaced with a new one...ensuring new generations of soaps to speak to new generations of audience.

Sadly at some point, the networks lost interest in investing anew.

That said, if they DID want to somehow link to "Bay City" or whatever, there would be nothing the matter with seeding the canvas of a new show with some favorites from an old show. That has often been done, although it has seldom had any meaningful effect on the health of the new show.

[Jess]

I think it would show health of the genre if old shows were allowed to die and replaced with new ones. I think fresh ideas with, perhaps, fresh writers would also show growth and development. I'm not sure if a total spinoff is a viable idea, but carrying over characters or families might work. It certainly panned out well for B&B, although that was a very long time ago. This idea that for a soap to be a success, it must stay on the air for decades, is just mystifying to me.

[BlueLick]

I agree with some of you guys. The idea of bringing in a new soap is just what the genre needs. There hasn't been a new daytime soap since 1999 when Passions first aired. I only mentioned bring back AW b/c it already had a built in audience that would watch it if the new show struggles to find its identity in the first two years.

The new soap would definitely have to change from the usual. No rich people, fantasy (aka Passions), and unreal characters just diversed average people on the show who have problems. I think something that identifies with the current economy would be perfect. The cast should feature young characters who are tough and real.

NBC would be perfect for debuting a new soap behind DAYS and the numbers shouldn't feature a huge dropoff as long as the show is good enough for people to watch on daily basis. I think NBC is actually planning on bringing in a new soap from the last I heard it was something called Fowler, but no other plans had been announced since DAYS signed their recent contract extension. If a new soap does come it would be in 2010, but NBC may still not be that confident in airing any other soaps outside of DAYS right now unless it comes at a cheap price.

[Jess]

I think you are so right, and I also agree with Mark that perhaps using some characters viewers recognize would be a good idea. I love Brothers & Sisters. I enjoy it so much that I miss it when it is gone. I really enjoyed Friday Night Lights. I hope it returns to NBC because my apartment won't allow the satellite. LOL. Those are the type shows that I think daytime might be able to do something with. These are shows that focus on a few characters and tell real life stories. Daytime needs a transitional leader, and right now there is only the same ol same ol.

[mamasita]

One thing that is missing from American soaps (compared to UK soaps or telenovelas from south america) is the poor or low middle class family, i see too many rich people, too many enterprises, almost nobody (age 25 and up) is struggling to pay the rent or to pay medical bills. I remember that Y &R had the low middle class family: Foster ..but they are all gone, Jill is the only one that jumped (quantum leap!) from working class to mega jet set CEO, she never went to college by the way.

[SteveFrame]

I agree.

I know that some think it is a nostalgia thing when you refer to how soaps used to be. But for me it is not a nostalgia thing of wanting soaps to be like they used to be and that being what keeps from enjoying todays shows. It is far beyond that.

I want soaps to be like they used to be but with a modern twist. I want them to be edgier and more appropriate to today's times.

That being said soaps need to look at their history and learn from them. That is not nostalgia it is just what soaps need to do in order to once again get in touch with their audience.

First as you said they need to restore the class systems. Soaps need to be a sense of escape but at the same time fans need to feel they can relate to the characters in order to get lost in them. For years the soaps offered that to the women that tuned in every day to see them. They saw women doing the same things they were doing, wearing the same clothes they were wearing, sitting at the kitchen table drinking coffee and talking about their kids and their lovers. The women could relate to them and thus they could believe that if they found true love or something great happened to them - then it could happen to me too. The women looked like them and not like models off the runway. They could escape into their lives so easily and believe in them because they were like them.

It was easy for them for instance to belief that what happened to Erica Kane could happen to them. She was from a small town, poor and she made it big. they could relate and thus they could dream with her.

The characters today not only don't look like them but even the characters who are supposed to be poor don't even dress like them. It is so far beyond anything that the average viewer can even relate too.

Also before I can remember viewers who wrote into the magazines would talk about relating with characters like Joanne Vincente who was widowed and how she struggled through it. Today they can't relate because those deaths are so easily overturned and thus viewers don't relate as much as they once did.

Soaps don't need to do stories like the old shows or go back to everything like they once did - but they do need to embrace their history and put some things back into soaps that should just be there. That is not nostalgia that is just good common sense.

Make it more realistic but with a modern twist. There are not that many housewives today, but they can show women who are balancing marriage, family and a career. No soap does that effectively anymore at all. Most of the soaps ignore the careers of their characters these days. They need to make the viewers relate so they can escape into the characters.

A new show that can effectively do that; embrace a new production model; and give it a modern edgier twist - then I feel it could be very successful.

[miajere]

I think the fixes are easier said than done. As soon as someone tries to go to raw and real and people start to miss the glamour. People will argue realism day in and day out.

I think it's hard to satisfy such a large diverse audience while trying to grab that young and hot demographic. For instance, if soaps really had to update themselves they have to figure out how to do that while keeping to a consistent time frame in story telling. Once characters go through a certain amount of experiences they start to act "out of character"- as we like to call them- ,run out of stories , eventually have to be traded in for character who could have a fresh set of experiences, or evolve- which most soap fans don't transition well to. Let a character grow up and we miss their "bitchy" days. Once again, it's that nostalgia, whereby I know what's best not just for the my character, but the show.

How can this "back to good" happen when the majority of people watching these shows don't want to see new characters- we find most of them boring and don't understand their purpose. People immediately start to beg for their favorites back- or as we like to call them "core". We say, "integrate the new characters slowly." Which works for some, but not all. We keep begging for things to go back, and tptb don't know when to turn that button off. But we seem to have this life long reference to what was good, and are constantly looking behind us for the answers. I'm reminded of the story of Sodom and Gommorah whereby Lot's wife looks longingly back at th city she once loved to witness its destruction and was transformed into a pilar of salt. Dramatic it may be, but I still think we should take what we learned but stay out of the past.

I agree that there was a spirit about the shows that once focused on getting in touch with the people watching, and not some mystical new fan base that will never come- it's those ideals the industry should get back to. But that's not in soaps past, it's a basic concept of keeping a customer happy. Creators and execs went with their gut in regards to storytelling,casting,negotiation- they looked at what was on their screens and not what some focus group told them was there. But those creators and execs weren't starring in the face of cancellation talks week in and week out, without the hopes of a new show to take the time slot.

I can say that what MBell is doing now is exactly what I imagined BBell would have done in this day and age, gone with his gut- failed alittle, but trust he knew what he was doing.

[SteveFrame]

It all comes down in a big part to a new breed of viewers from waht you are saying. Because all the stuff that you mention are things that soaps dealt with for years and overcame.

And it boils down to a new breed of writers and producers who don't have balls and at the first hint of discord in the viewership switch gears and go backward.

Many characters grew and changed and did not go back or revert. Julie Williams on Days left her bitchy ways behind and never turned back. Rachel Davis on AW did the same. Lisa Hughes grew and changed through the years.

Big names stars were fired. Couples split up and moved on. Many big named stars left and their characters died and were never heard from again.

Many characters stayed basically the same for many years without any drastic rewriters in their history or becoming boring. Case in point Joanne Tourneur who was a character that was pretty much the focus of Search For Tomorrow for 35 years. Same for Vanessa Sterling on Love of Life who was a main character from 1951 to 1980. They weren't always front and center but writers never felt the need to alter from the original core concepts of their characters. In the last 5 years of the show the highest ratings that Search For Tomorrow got was from a story that featured Joanne front and center.

Joanne and Vanessa never became glitzy and glamorous stars.

What I find weird is that for the most part the glitz and glamour age of daytime soaps came about because of the Reagan era soaps like Dynasty and Dallas. All the daytime soaps bought into that and they changed. Many of the primetime shows did too. All of them were molded into that pattern.

What is weird is that primetime shows reverted and grew from that era to the point that you can have primetime soaps like Desperate Housewives that have modern day sets but it is not all glitz and glamour.

But daytime soaps have been stuck in the same mode for the most part and never grew out of that change. And as you said many fans won't allow it.

Shows like Desperate Housewives and Brothers & Sisters have both struck a chord with audiences in that they do have the modern edge to them but basically for the most part any family can relate with the things that are going on inside those shows.

A show like Dirty Sexy Money wasn't able to tap into that and look at it - it failed. Viewers cannot relate to the Darling family as easy as they can to the families on DH and B&S. DSM has struggled and is going bye bye.

And one other thing soaps have never been about realism and that is not what I am condoning. Soaps were about being based in realism but they were pure fantasy. Soap viewers always knew that it was a fantasy and it was escapism, but because they could relate to the characters - they could imagine that if Joanne could find her true love then I can too. Or if Erica can make it I can too - because they could relate.

The stories and the characters were based in reality but they were filled with pure fantasy and wrought with drama, intrigue, mystery, suspense, fantasy, romance, and problems.

I remember one fan letter that a magazine called Afternoon TV printed back in the 70's from one of the viewers. If I can find it today I will post part of it. I don't even remember what show she was referring too now, but the jist of the fan letter was that she knew that the problems were make believe and stuff, but everyday she could tune in and get caught up in the problems of her fave and for that 30 minutes she could forget all of her own problems. The heroine on the screen had more problems and such difficulties that it made her's seem miniscule in comparison.

They related. They felt. It was just like in 1973 when Erica had her abortion and then got sick from it in the first few months of 1974. Calls and letters poured into the studio from nurses and doctors who knew how to help Erica and wanted to help her.

In 1976, when Stu Bergman finally made the big step and moved on for the first time since his wife Marge died in 1973, he got numerous letters from fans who could relate to what was happening. Then when he married finally in June it was said that Search For Tomorrow got more letters and cards with well wishes for the couple than it had ever gotten.

It was the same reason that in the late 60's and early 70's that Eileen Fulton had to hire a body guard to walk the streets of New York with her after a woman came up to her on the street and started beating her with her purse calling her a bad mother for what she was doing to her son Tommy and all other sorts of names.

Some of the fans may have carried it overboard, but the fact was that they identified with the characters. They felt for them. They became like family to them.

the sad thing is that today many fans go overboard but in a very different way. The things I read these days are not about how they relate to the characters, but it is all about things threatening their relationship or the writers not being fair to their fave. Or so and so needs to get a story. Or I am so tired of the powers that be screwing us over. Or another couple on the show is getting more air time or has gotten more storylines this year than our fave has.

I guess some fans might call that caring. It is a different kind of caring. I would personally rather as a writer have fans who cared about the problems of my character more than how much airtime they are getting.

One of the first changes that has got to made is that the writers and producers have got to grow a set of balls. They need to tell their stories, monitor the viewers, but don't abandon at the first seed of discord. Because with the modern viewer, it is going to come because the modern viewer as has been pointed out doesnt' want change.

Maybe it is nostalgia or whatever you want to call it, but I do want soaps to be like they used to be. Soaps used to be about change - the shows held on to their basic formula but they did change - they allowed characters to change, couples moved on, characters grew, change was embraced - as long as it made sense. Viewers didn't accept big fly by night changes that didn't make sense to the characters, but for the most part that didn't happen too often.

When it did start to happen such as after the Luke/Laura heyday started when so many of the other shows abandon what had made them unigue to copy the Luke/Laura pattern of GH - then viewers did start to abandon many of the soaps. They no longer were true to the core of what made them special, and fans didn't stick around. The one show that remained true to itself was Y&R and what did it do. It rose to the top while so many of the others fell to the bottom and disappeared forever. I can remember another fan letter that an NBC fan wrote in the mid 80's. I don't have it anymore, but this lady wrote in about the changes on AW and Days. She basically told the magazine that she was tired of the new Days and AW who she felt were becoming more and more like GH at the time. She said if she wanted to watch GH she would, but she didn't she wanted to watch Days and AW but they were gone forever.

Oh well another long tyrade. Sorry.

[miajere]

I wouldn't call what's happening simply nostalgia, and I do agree on many of your points....But, I don't think everything you spoke of happens with the a new writer, or the a new exec, or simply following some past model...I think it takes a team with the right heart and soul for this industry. And in the same way that new writers used to get large numbers of front burner characters to clean house- I think it's about time daytime did that with some of their execs and behind the scenes people not taking care of the legacies they've been given. They've seemed to have learned nothing from the past and can't make good sense of the future.

As for new viewers, I don't think they're coming in the numbers tptb are hoping for. I think the people who have never been exposed in some way or another to the soaps by family or friends, will never breath the life needed into the ratings.

But IMO there's more to the numbers and new viewers than just DVRs and cable options- it lies in the ideas behind sustainability and redesign, which I would give the daytime industry(minus Y&R) an F. There's been mention that these shows don't have any long term plans, which is why they are constantly responding to ratings. You mentioned good, fresh, talented writers- which is the first step, and it requires more than one, it takes a team; because if I had to redesign a coke machine, I would hope the coke isn't flat.