ATWT and GL cancellation sealed the death of soaps. Yes, there will still be 6 soaps but pretty soon Days or OLTL will be axed. Leaving less and less soaps on the air.

I knew that once one of the Big Eight (Yes, I include B&B, even though it's "only" 23 years old) was axed, they'd all start falling off like dominoes. Other short-lived soaps (Passions, Port Charles, Sunset Beach) can come 'n go, but once the long-time shows start getting pulled off the airwaves, it's a sure thing the other ones will soon follow.

I realize that some will bring up the argument that ABC owns its soaps, so they (objectively) deserve a longer life despite lower ratings. Yet, ownership or no, there has to come a point when a show's ratings are so horrendous that cancellation is merited. If we use the logic that the AMC and GH deserve to remain on the air regardless of their ratings performance, then how is that fair to fans of Loving/The City and Port Charles? Those soaps were ABC owned yet still cancelled, despite bringing in higher ratings than what AMC and GH receive now. (Well, okay, I'm not 100% certain if Port Charles dipped slighly below the all-time ratings nadirs hit by the current ABC soaps.) The fact that ABC owned Loving/The City and Port Charles did not exempt them from the consequences of poor ratings performance; AMC and GH should not be any different (their rabid fan bases and the pimping they receive from the soap media do not make them "special" soaps).

It's all a sign of the times. Network television can't expect the numbers it received 15-20 years ago because so much of their viewers have gone to cable or the internet. So while once upon a time Santa Barbara's low 3's prompted cancellation, now low 3's would be a vast improvement. Same with primetime network television. I believe Desperate Housewives just had 12 million viewers for their latest episode, and they're still a top-viewed TV show. Compare that to the mid-80's when The Cosby Show had 30 million viewers on a weekly basis. It's a sign of the times.

So, marceline, you won't reply to what Max had to say? And no, this is not baiting, I'm intrigued by the possible answers.

If you insist.

There is no explanation because the question isn't a valid one, at least not as far as I can see. It's not a matter of fairness. ABC, CBS and NBC are different businesses with different objectives. GL and ATWT got canceled because P&G didn't think it was worth dealing with them anymore. There wasn't enough value in it. End of story. ABC and NBC still see some value in their soaps so they're still here but the moment a more valuable property makes itself available those shows are dead. If all the soaps were owned by one entity then maybe we could discuss fairness but right now it like expecting Burger King to stop carrying the chicken sandwich just because McDonalds is no longer selling the McRib.

JMHO.

Edited May 23, 201015 yr by marceline

Creative Horizons owned Loving/The City till the end.

If you insist.

There is no explanation because the question isn't a valid one, at least not as far as I can see. It's not a matter of fairness. ABC, CBS and NBC are different businesses with different objectives. GL and ATWT got canceled because P&G didn't think it was worth dealing with them anymore. There wasn't enough value in it. End of story. ABC and NBC still see some value in their soaps so they're still here but the moment a more valuable property makes itself available those shows are dead. If all the soaps were owned by one entity then maybe we could discuss fairness but right now it like expecting Burger King to stop carrying the chicken sandwich just because McDonalds is no longer selling the McRib.

JMHO.

Of coooourse! That's the answer I was hoping you'd give.

Not terribly happy with the stories on OLTL right now but happy for them. Up slightly in the ratings, 3rd in the key demo and 2nd among girls 12-17. Pretty cool. Now let's cut back on the teeny bopper stuff, have Jessica regain her memory, and finally put an end to who/what killed Melinda, have Rex find his parents, and start summer off with fresh, new stories and better ratings.

They probably think the ratings increase are down to more focus on the teens. I do notice the ratings go up when this truly horrible and dull Kelly story is briefly MIA.

I know a lot of people hate Starr but it seems like when she's on the frontburner the young demos go up.

Eric, the current ratings for DOOL and the ABC soaps are virtually indentical to what ATWT received upon its cancellation. (GL was .1 or .2 points lower when it got cancelled; the new lows it hit came after it received the ax.) As for those "all-important" demos, they sure seem to suck right now for DOOL; apart from GH, ABC really isn't doing much better.

I realize that some will bring up the argument that ABC owns its soaps, so they (objectively) deserve a longer life despite lower ratings. Yet, ownership or no, there has to come a point when a show's ratings are so horrendous that cancellation is merited. If we use the logic that the AMC and GH deserve to remain on the air regardless of their ratings performance, then how is that fair to fans of Loving/The City and Port Charles? Those soaps were ABC owned yet still cancelled, despite bringing in higher ratings than what AMC and GH receive now. (Well, okay, I'm not 100% certain if Port Charles dipped slighly below the all-time ratings nadirs hit by the current ABC soaps.) The fact that ABC owned Loving/The City and Port Charles did not exempt them from the consequences of poor ratings performance; AMC and GH should not be any different (their rabid fan bases and the pimping they receive from the soap media do not make them "special" soaps).

Sad fact is that ATWT is basically tied with AMC, B&B, and OLTL in ratings and DEMOS with only .2 seperating the bottom four shows. Everyone always harps about the bad ATWT demos but they are only slightly below average and not nearly poor enough to turn off ad buyers. Generally, the soap era as we knew it is over and CBS is moving on looking for lower cost programming. Repeats of Cold Case and CSI are now rating higher than most soaps so why would a network want to waste money? ABC is sort of stuck because of SoapNet but the cable outlet does allow them to repurpose the line up and it gives them original content which is still rare on cable. I do not believe that any network is holding onto a soap because of history or fan backlash. There are no special soaps! The soap media makes, via heavy press and promo, special soaps and it is reflected in the ratings. A good example of this can be found in the fact that no soap mag has even given ATWT a cover in years but stirs up Victor buzz that helps Y&R.

I'm sure ABC is already looking at new options to replace both SoapNet and the daytime lineup. With over 100 cable channels plus internet there really is no room for original programming in the daytiume., a network can make just as much money with either a gameshow or by using the cable business model of repeats. I can seriously see a network like NBC replaying primetime shows during the daytime.

Frankly, I'd welcome reruns of primetime shows in daytime. Soaps just need to die, pure and simple.

Frankly, I'd welcome reruns of primetime shows in daytime. Soaps just need to die, pure and simple.

It was a difficult road, but finally you've come to that conclusion.

Edited May 26, 201015 yr by Sylph

Listen, when Gary Tomlin won't touch ALL MY [!@#$%^&*] CHILDREN, a show every hack in the business would have given their youngest child to work for back in the day, because he thinks it's unsalvageable? It's time to admit defeat.

That's just sad. And true.