With GL's demos and overall ratings, I think CBS was more than justified to cancel the show. I know it's sad, but GL brings in relatively low ad revenue for CBS, thus continuing the show is not a wise investment for them any longer.

They kept the show on much longer than the ratings and ad revenue justified, IMO.

GL's ratings were back on the upswing.

Also, in a broader view, for a network struggling to hold on to viewers in competition with cable, it is a huge mistake. Way to alienate some of your most loyal viewers, CBS, way to alienate!

Obama was speaking today and CBS was the ONLY local channel that kept their soaps going. This is the first time I've ever seen this done by CBS. Are they trying to lure soap viewers to their soaps? Trying to keep them? hm...

Everyone keeps tlaking about how the soaps are "declining"... is there any hard data on their decline as compared to all of daytime programming? What kind of numbers do the court shows and talk shows pull?

I know Oprah is declining. I'd assume all of daytime is declining because all of BROADCAST is declining. There is NOTHING SPECIAL about the decline of daytime, at least in the last decade:

GL's ratings were back on the upswing.

Also, in a broader view, for a network struggling to hold on to viewers in competition with cable, it is a huge mistake. Way to alienate some of your most loyal viewers, CBS, way to alienate!

No, they were not on an upswing, not in ANY meaningful sense, sadly.

No, they were not on an upswing, not in ANY meaningful sense, sadly.

1.4 in November to 1.7 in March. Not "meaningful" but still over 20%.

1.4 in November to 1.7 in March. Not "meaningful" but still over 20%.

didn't they have a 1.5 last week?

The cultural shift of women entering the workplace as well as alternative programming are the major causes for the decline in the Daytime audience. All Daytime programming has suffered. Of course, the crappy writing has driven a share of the remaining audience away, but is not the main reason that the soaps on are on the edge. It definitely does not help an already bad situation.

Very true. Yeah, bad writing doesn't help, but at the same time consistently good or decent writing didn't keep any soap from dropping through the years. Remember back in 2000 when people were all scared because The Young & the Restless fell below a 6.0 for the first time? Did Y&R suddenly lose its quality writing that year or was it just a sign of the times and a continuing downward trend for all daytime network programs?

Kim Zimmer issued a statement on GL's passing:

http://www.mlive.com/tv/index.ssf/2009/04/...est_michig.html

It's so difficult to express how one feels at a time like this," Zimmer said in a written statement to The Press. "It's different when an actor chooses to leave for any length of time, because the comfort is in knowing that the show will always be there, but this is it for our little family as we know it and love it, and I'm in mourning! It has been a GREAT ride though!"

" I would like to thank all our fans who have hung in there with us," Zimmer said. "I pray we will deliver to you Classic Guiding Light right up to the end

Very true. Yeah, bad writing doesn't help, but at the same time consistently good or decent writing didn't keep any soap from dropping through the years. Remember back in 2000 when people were all scared because The Young & the Restless fell below a 6.0 for the first time? Did Y&R suddenly lose its quality writing that year or was it just a sign of the times and a continuing downward trend for all daytime network programs?

Bingo!

The problem is... People forget: writing started sucking from the very beginning. And it started sucking slowly and as slowly as it started sucking, the ratings started falling. Get that? No one here says: The writing is the only thing to blame.

The writing didn't evolve, it actually took a step in the opposite evolutionary direction. And here we are today.

Edited April 2, 200916 yr by Sylph

I don't know how a genre that's existed over 50 years that airs episodes 5 days a week can seriously evolve anyway.

I do not think GL will be rising in the ratings unfortunately, I actually think the show will end up around 1.5 until a slight resurgence at the end.. If memory serves, when a soap is announced as being cancelled the ratings start to drop soon after. I hope that this "end of ATWT in 2010" doesn't start gathering momentum because I think ATWT will drop permanently into the 1.8 zone.

The problem is... People forget: writing started sucking from the very beginning. And it started sucking slowly and as slowly as it started sucking, the ratings started falling. Get that? No one here says: The writing is the only thing to blame.

The writing didn't evolve, it actually took a step in the opposite evolutionary direction. And here we are today.

Well, I'd like to take on your point about not "evolving".

Roger Newcomb posted this lovely bit from David Hinckley of the New York Daily News. I just love his language, and his implication that GL is where it is--quite naturally--because it has come to the end of its lifespan. There is a cycle of things...nothing lives forever. Why protest the ending of something that gave so much pleasure to so many for so long. They have almost 6 months to pen a satisfying conclusion.

Along the way, the GL story changed course, from a drama about a preacher to a drama about doctors and lawyers. Only a few real old-timers today would recall the original "guiding light" from which it took its title.

No matter. Change happens. The show's life has been well-lived and its legacy is secure. If the world and the media have shifted out from under GUIDING LIGHT, well, it would be far more surprising if after 72 years the world and media had not undergone profound changes.

Or, to put it another way, imagine talking to someone in 1937 about nuclear weapons, the Internet, polio vaccine or a Big Mac.

Like the comic strip "Peanuts" or the recently deceased radio commentator Paul Harvey, GUIDING LIGHT lived long enough to become a respected anachronism, a pop-culture landmark that for years was on the same corner whenever we drove through town.

It's not the cackle of the Grim Reaper. It is the whisper of time.

Like the comic strip "Peanuts" or the recently deceased radio commentator Paul Harvey, GUIDING LIGHT lived long enough to become a respected anachronism, a pop-culture landmark that for years was on the same corner whenever we drove through town.

"Peanuts" ended with the passing of Charles Schultz. Paul Harvey's show ended with his passing. GL has lived for over 35 years after the passing of Irna Phillips.

I see what they're saying, but since GL was ended against its will, and when some thought the show was improving, I think some fans are more upset than they would have been if the show had ended by its own choice.

"Peanuts" ended with the passing of Charles Schultz. Paul Harvey's show ended with his passing. GL has lived for over 35 years after the passing of Irna Phillips.

I see what they're saying, but since GL was ended against its will, and when some thought the show was improving, I think some fans are more upset than they would have been if the show had ended by its own choice.

But isn't it satisfying knowing the show is ending when its finally found some of its groove again? I know we all claim it's easier to let go when we feel our shows are lost and beyond repair, but I think there's some peace in knowing the show ended with the best possible quality it could have ended with. Who knows how things would have been a year from now? nothing is ever consistent in soap-land. GL fans have redemption in knowing the show didn't limp to its death creatively, but it was a respectful passing that left fans proud to be, well, fans.