Guess what? I thought that column was the worst piece of cr*p full of sh!t ever. Or let me re-phrase: it was hastily written, short, lame, predictable, full of silly little suggestions (hired a new writer then if it doesn't work, fire him or her... yeah... Dear Lord... ), zero true insights but tons of fake ones, a totally disappointing hackjob. It was awful. And it'll probably have zero impact. Partly because she wasn't really invested in writing it, just thumped something out. It's a mish-mash of various most frequent fan opinions from all over the internet. Sara, Sara... What's going on?!

Alvin said Sylph summarized the points of low quality in Bibel's last piece well. Here is what Sylph said:

"it was hastily written". How do we know?

"predictable". In what sense? And even if this is true, because many have made similar suggestions, since when is predictability a flaw?

"full of silly little suggestions". In what sense are the suggestions "silly"? They make perfect sense to me.

"zero true insights but tons of fake ones"? How are we to distinguish the true from fake insights? On what basis? Who judges their relative fakedness? On what basis?

"mish-mash of various most frequent fan opinions". Even if this were true, what would make it wrong? Summarizing, cogently, the basis of customer dissatisfaction is WRONG? I call it quality-assurance management 101!

And lastly, even if every assertion above were correct (and I content most of these assertions are NOT evidence-based), what makes her piece now -- or in the past -- of "low quality"? What basis?

LOL! Of course people will disagree with Sara's opinion. Because it's just that - an opinion. If nobody was going to disagree, I would think it would be called a fact.

I'm just pointing out how deeply personal it's getting for her. She's less afraid to call it like she sees it (not saying how she sees it is the correct way - just how she sees it). It's rare she ever gets that visceral in her blog.

She was talking about the whole ABC lineup. She's saying let Pratt and Guza and Carlivati run free FOR A LITTLE WHILE, and see what happens. That is truly good management.

Whose to say that Guza and Pratt don't run free? I find it hard to believe that Frons wouldn't allow his BFF's Pratt and Guza to have as much creative license as they'd like. The three appear to be very close, and their relationship goes back to their days on Santa Barbara. Carlivati might be another story, or his honeymoon period might have ended, which could attest for the drop in quality OLTL has experienced this year.

Again, how does Sara know what Guza, Pratt, and Carlivati are going through anyway? Where's her concrete proof that Frons or ABC is continually sabotaging their work?

I've known Guza's work for years, with and without Frons, and honestly, I can definitely attest to GH being his vision and what he likes.

Wendy Riche might have calmed a lot of Guza's tendencies when she ran GH with him, but a lot of what's been exploited hugely over the past few years on GH, was even apparent back then.

And yes, she does hold the widely shared view that the writing is "amiss". Clearly, though, she believes the primary problem is corporate interference, so that better storytelling can prevail.

And again, we have Guza's (and even Pratt's) trackrecord over the years without Frons and the current ABC Daytime management to speak for itself.

Whose to say that Guza and Pratt don't run free? I find it hard to believe that Frons wouldn't allow his BFF's Pratt and Guza to have as much creative license as they'd like. The three appear to be very close, and their relationship goes back to their days on Santa Barbara. Carlivati might be another story, or his honeymoon period might have ended, which could attest for the drop in quality OLTL has experienced this year.

Again, how does Sara know what Guza, Pratt, and Carlivati are going through anyway? Where's her concrete proof that Frons or ABC is continually sabotaging their work?

I've known Guza's work for years, with and without Frons, and honestly, I can definitely attest to GH being his vision and what he likes.

Wendy Riche might have calmed a lot of Guza's tendencies when she ran GH with him, but a lot of what's been exploited hugely over the past few years on GH, was even apparent back then.

And again, we have Guza's (and even Pratt's) trackrecord over the years without Frons and the current ABC Daytime management to speak for itself.

Even if I accept the facts of what you write, Sara was talking about more than Guza. What, for example, if Carlivati was left alone?

And none this speaks to the 'facts" of Sara's column with which you agree with Sylph...hastily written...predictable...of low quality. It is these items I was actually more directly asking about.

Are we getting the other ratings info? Especially the dailies?

And none this speaks to the 'facts" of Sara's column with which you agree with Sylph...hastily written...predictable...of low quality. It is these items I was actually more directly asking about.

It's not about facts, it's how her columns come off.

R Sinclair did a wonderful job, IMO, of summarizing how many of her colums come off.

http://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/index.p...25&start=25

You know? I mean, come on! She's a soap writer, for God's sake! Let us know what it's like writing for a character who has been recast. Give us some writer insight. Do you write up to the new actor's strengths? Do you write down to disguise the new actor's limitations? Do you write the same and force the new actor to meet the character where they are?

I mean, really. If your claim to fame is for being an "unemployed soap writer," give us some soap writer info that regular soap "journalists" can't give us because of the fact they were never involved in the process.

It's almost as if she needed to meet a deadline for her column, so she just wrote down things anybody who has been watching this show for the last ten years would know as to why Jamie Lunar's Liza is different from Marcy Walker's Liza.

I'm sorry, but all this SAB is doing is being yet another Logan or Branco... being another critic instead of offering insight.

She's saying let Pratt and Guza and Carlivati run free FOR A LITTLE WHILE, and see what happens. That is truly good management.

Woah, Woah, Woah! Stop right there! Letting those 3 run free is like handing a gun to a serial killer. They already run free as it is. Pratt and Guza that is. Those two and Frons do whatever they want, however they want. That's a fact! I don't think we need a press release saying so, we can see that when we turn on All My Children and General Hospital and watch their rich histories tarnished. GH has been the vision of Guza since he first came on in 1996. Wendy Riche did prevent some of his garbage and after her it's just been out of control. AMC will be Pratt's vision. It will be fully destroyed if he hasn't already destroyed it yet.

I always try to look at both sides of the spectrum when I analyze things and form opinions, but when it comes to those fools (Guza, Pratt and Frons) and that's what they are, it's all right there in front of you. They do whatever they want and they don't care.

I may be the only one here who doesn't know a lot about Sarah Bibel, but her blog came across as a culmination of all the other blogs and internet stuff that's been posted for years now and it came across as bitter versus constructive.. I don't see any new insight here. And while I'll say Frons is a poor exec, he doesn't pen the show's himself. He can approve or nix an idea or potential storyline, but he does't write the stuff. And where is the proof aside from internet fodder that Frons is some Svengali when it comes to writing these shows. I think Frons is horrid, but I still think these fools are allowed as much latitude as they want.

Edited May 2, 200916 yr by JaneAusten

I'm jumping into the fray.

Mark, Slyph's post was over the top, but I really do not think that you should defend Sara's ill advised and ignorant blog comment. You have admitted that you not watch ABC soaps and certainly not GH on a regular basis. It is clear from Sara's blog comment that she does not either. She does not sound knowledgeable about what has been rumored for years about GH behind the scenes or what happens on the screen. Her idea to let Guza and Phelps do what they please to GH for 6 months is pure insanity and crazy talk. No one who watches or cares about GH would think that is a good idea. GH would be canceled in by the end of the year.

Y&RWorldTurner IS right. GH is Guza's vision. Read his interviews from the soap mags over the years. He loves the mob and its violence. He wants the show to revolve around Sonny, Jason and Carly. This isn't Frons, it is him. GH is consistently Guza. Frons needs to meddle more at GH. As for RC at OLTL, RC is not the first headwriter to have to battle network executives if his storytelling sucks it is on him, not Frons. Sara really needs to stick to the CBS soaps which are her specialty.

jfung, you make a good point about Burton's role in how Jason Morgan has turned out, but this has only happened because Guza loves the mob and see Sonny and Jason as his wonderful anti-heroes. Bernard, Burton and Guza share the same brain when it comes to all mob things on GH.

I may be the only one here who doesn't know a lot about Sarah Bibel, but her blog came across as a culmination of all the other blogs and internet stuff that's been posted for years now and it came across as bitter versus constructive.. I don't see any new insight here. And while I'll say Frons is a poor exec, he doesn't pen the show's himself. He can approve or nix an idea or potential storyline, but he does't write the stuff. And where is the proof aside from internet fodder that Frons is some Svengali when it comes to writing these shows. I think Frons is horrid, but I still think these fools are allowed as much latitude as they want.

Frons is in charge, period. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Heck, when he first started, he said he saw a spark in Courtney and Jason on GH, and he's the one who insisted the two become a couple (not to mention make Courtney a stripper for awhile, lol). He also saw Marcy Walker as "washed up," and had them stop writing for her at AMC. Ditto every other woman over 40. Frons (and Guza/Pratt) are all into the "trash-flash" woman, the "whore" with the heart of gold, and they think that's what women want to see. That's what Frons has built ABC daytime on, the white trash woman who's really just a misunderstood "scrapper." All the women of class, like Robin Christopher's Skye, for instance, they just couldn't figure out how to write for.

They're the man-boys who can't think of having sex with a woman unless she's got whore-like qualities. If a woman has class, or sophistication, or real intelligence, they're lost.....they become impotent little boys.

(I'll never forget Pratt saying of some actress on GH, who I can't remember, that she wasn't someone he'd want to f*ck....and therefore, not worthy of a storyline).

Edited May 2, 200916 yr by Carolyn1980

(I'll never forget Pratt saying of some actress on GH, who I can't remember, that she wasn't someone he'd want to f*ck....and therefore, not worthy of a storyline).

I know NOTHING these people say should surprise me, but I am STUNNED to hear this.

Does anybody else remember who this was?????

(I'll never forget Pratt saying of some actress on GH, who I can't remember, that she wasn't someone he'd want to f*ck....and therefore, not worthy of a storyline).

What a disgusting pig. People like him, Guza and Frons should all have their heads cut off for what they did to ABCD. BOTH HEADS! There really needs to be a "watch dog" of television in general who puts a stop to the agism, sexism and the rest of the garbage that takes place!

Guza is also a disgusting pig. I watched Kelly Monaco on Port Charles, I never saw her in her underwear or half naked as much as since she has joined GH. Women watch soaps, why would them want to see half naked women? It is all those middle age male ABC executives and writers who want to jerk off and drool over these attractive young women. Meanwhile Steve Burton is a romantic leading man who won't take off his shirt or stay in shape.

Edited May 2, 200916 yr by Ann_SS

Ann_SS, you're right, I don't watch regularly.

But I really want you to carry this thread to the extreme.

Now, we wipe out Frons, Pratt, Guza, and Carlivati tomorrow. Make 'em all go away. Start fresh. Let's -- I don't know -- put a revitalized Agnes Nixon in charge of AMC, Karen Harris and Sri Rao in charge of GH, and some exciting unknown auteur in charge of OLTL.

Will everything miraculously be solved?

No. It will be CHAOS. Organizationally, you just can't change that number of unknowns at once. Your viewers will sense the chaos, and abandon ship.

One one show, I could see it. But all three at once?

Guza is also a disgusting pig. I watched Kelly Monaco on Port Charles, I never saw her in her underwear or half naked as much as since she has joined GH. Women watch soaps, why would them want to see half naked women? It is all those middle age male ABC executives and writers who want to jerk off and drool over these attractive young women. Meanwhile Steve Burton is a romantic leading man who won't take off his shirt or stay in shape.

Oh my God!

Well I think its more than that as one of their fans I can only speak for myself and what others have expressed on our network. In five words Brian Frons, Bob Guza writing.

Personally, I hit the exit door regarding the treatment of Kent-Masters-King, Kiko Ellsworth (had a big fanbase that walked as well), and Minae's Kelly Lee, Koing of the Qs, the buffoonery of Luke, NLG"s Alexis no story, the LukenLaura trashing of history, Georgy, years of too much mob also other storylines that were dropped for some newbie du jour from some other show who was being treated with more respect and more airtime than the characters/actors hanging tough in the trenches ( eg Monica's alchoholism storyline given the bum's rush)...not much air for Matt w/his own storyline ...the Spinelli show... Det Cruz one minute he was there then he was gone.these are some of the myriad of reasons I've read.

The treatment of our ten year fanbase rooting for our two favs isn't worthy of tuning out

eventhough probably some did soley because of it, but a majority I've come across

was about the writing of the show and the treatment of vets/actors" I think the lack of Liason just pissed a lot of their fans off.

African Americans were / are loyal soap watchers and that audience is gone for the "most" part they should be included in these declining #s as well the writing is on the wall for the "most part on GH" African Americans will only be in supporting or recurring and will not get top tier A lead story under any umbrella.

What a wonderful response! I'm sorry for the snarky comment about Jason/Liz fans. I just get annoyed with the groundswell at places like Nelson Branco, DC, that GH would improve in the ratings if only Jason and Liz would marry, and why can't they listen to the fans. GH has rotted to the core, yet the idea is now if only this couple would marry, then great times are ahead. I thought Scrubs had a good wedding (by today's soap standards), but their PPD story was still a mess, and the ratings still fell, so you would think this proves how limited a soap wedding is for increasing numbers.