WLS linked this USA Today story on the death of soaps. The new "indie" soaps get some coverage.

But check out Frons' revelatory quote about canceling soaps. Sensitive much?

"Some (soaps) have been on many years, so people feel the need to make sage-like statements about the future of the genre," Frons says. "Nobody makes those statements when a sitcom or long-running drama dies. It's the end of that program, and that's the way we should look at it as well."

that quote was true 30 years ago when one soap went another came.

but its been about 10 years and 5 soaps have gone and another just got the axe with no new soaps coming.

Frons, people have been saying sitcoms are dying for YEARS.

Someone muzzle him please

Edited January 4, 201015 yr by Zendall Fan

So, are you implying, by that quote, Frons wants to cancel one of his three soaps?

Edited January 4, 201015 yr by bellcurve

I didn't read Frons' comment as him wanting to cancel one of his soaps. He merely was saying that when a show runs its course and ratings drop, regardless of the genre, it will end. I think Brian Frons wants the genre to survive and he is doing everything he can to see that ABC keeps its soaps.

I think that quote is right. That there´s been no new soap created in the last decade is saying nothing for future. It´s not hard to imagine situation where almost all soaps are replaced by the game and talk shows, people gets tired with them and someone decides to develop some new soap again and with a great success. It´s a process and technologically in a few years there will be really no problem to tape the shows very economically, without various sets and huge expensive studios, just using greenscreen and CGI. That will be a complet gamechanger.

The comment that annoys me the most in that article is this one, "...greater use of CGI will allow "spectacular stunts," ABC Daytime president Brian Frons says." It gives a real insight to ABC/Guza's view of what brings in the audience and makes a good soap. Instead of focusing on stunts which seem to be failing more and more, it would be good if they focused on better storytelling.

Edited January 4, 201015 yr by Ann_SS

I didn't read Frons' comment as him wanting to cancel one of his soaps. He merely was saying that when a show runs its course and ratings drop, regardless of the genre, it will end. I think Brian Frons wants the genre to survive and he is doing everything he can to see that ABC keeps its soaps.

Maybe he does care about the genre, but he has a shitty way of showing it, he's one of the reasons ABC Daytime is in the state it's in.

I get tired of these types of articles. They obviously don't care about talking about soaps in depth (although to be fair they are talking about all of daytime, unlike that awful EW article which was supposed to be about soaps only), so we get these old tropes about how people don't have time, as if people were all glued to the couch until a few years ago. Never any talk about how soaps have actively chased away viewers for years and years with bad writing, apathetic producers, and insulting, regressive storylines.

As for Frons, this is nothing new. He made a comment months ago about keeping some soaps but putting something else between them, which seemed to mean OLTL would be going.

Maybe he does care about the genre, but he has a shitty way of showing it, he's one of the reasons ABC Daytime is in the state it's in.

I think Frons truly doesn't understand why soap fans watch soaps and is a bit of an idiot, to put it mildly. But I do think he wants his shows on the air and to do well and don't buy into any of the belief that he's secretly plotting their demise--he seems more investeed in them, as well, then CBS's head.

Unfortunately, he's right (and you know I HATE to say that.) The problem isn't the fact that we're losing the shows, the problem is we haven't gotten any new ones. People try to turn existing shows into new ones i.e. GH becoming the Sopranos and all it does is whittle away the audience. With each new regime, viewers quit because the show doesn't feel the same and very few new viewers show up.

While I hate that fu...... uh... man with every fibre - he's looking at it from the POV of a businessman and not a fan, I can't fault him for that, it would be nice if he was an actual fan (no one can convince me he is) but he & ABC are in it for the $$$$.

Everyone keeps talking so much about the death of soaps, that we might end up having a ressurection.

Frons, people have been saying sitcoms are dying for YEARS.

Someone muzzle him please

I agree. Back when a soap got cancelled, another soap would come and take its place. But now, that doesn't happen. I mean in those days, if a soap got cancelled, it was sad, but another one would come along and the genre would still go strong. Now, it's way more serious if a soap gets cancelled, because it's been TEN YEARS since a cancelled soap got replaced with a new soap (I believe Passions replaced Another World, correct?)

So, are you implying, by that quote, Frons wants to cancel one of his three soaps?

I don't read specific intention to cancel. But I do read an utter lack of sentimentality about canceling. The derision about "sage" pronouncements suggests to me that he has no specific intention to preserve the genre either.

As JP said, in an era of no replacements, and his lack of concern about cancellation (when the time comes) suggests (to me) that he will preside over the sunsetting of ABC's soaps when the financials no longer make sense (to keep them on). Since we can all read the data equally well, I think that means that Frons will oversee the end of ABC daytime soaps some time this decade.

There is another message here: Since he now clearly sees the end of the road (and is resigned to/comfortable with it), it means that I don't think we'll see any heroic moves to save the genre on his part. I think it lends clarity, for example, to the decision to reduce the impact of soaps on Soapnet. He is clearly positioning that cable network for the end of a genre that -- quite without emotion -- he sees as more-or-less imminent.

That's my read of quote.