Is ABC Preparing to Cancel AMC and OLTL?

[EricMontreal22]

Speaking of shakeups, PBS needs one. They've become largely irevelent to the very people who used to fund them thanks to BBC America, etc, etc. Downton Abbey, even in the idiotically gutted version they showed, was apparently one of their biggest successes in a while. Surely this should tell them something?

[SFK]

Yeah, I mean, Swans Crossing and Tribes couldn't hold a candle to classic Degrassi and at least early seasons of TNG. TNG is HUGE, the reruns would certainly do well on CW or MyNetwork in the evenings. There is definitely still an interest in scripted drama, it just can't be crap. On MyNetwork (at least in my area), we have hour blocks of Sanford and Son, Good Times, and Everybody Hates Chris from 1-4, judge shows thereafter. Sitcom reruns and judge shows. All inexpensive I'm sure. I'd at least like to see the experiement of plugging Degrassi reruns into that 4 or 5pm slot.

I can't help but also think of what Saturday mornings look like these days. Cartoons have all but disappeared with a bunch of boring as hell weekend versions of the network morning shows or infomercials out the ass. A poor non-cable having kid can barely enjoy the Saturday morning cartoon experience. But alas, these new stations like THIS and Qubo have even answered that call.

[EricMontreal22]

I think ABC Daytime did need a shakeup. I don't think a Tori Spelling talk show and wthe kind of reality show I expect from them *is* it though and I don't think it will give them a big hands up in daytime. It's a very very safe reactionist decision. (That, yes, makes complete financial sense).

[Errol]

I didn't mean you specifically, Jack, in my last sentence. I meant that in general. Clearly there is something to these talks of cancellation rumors or else they wouldn't be so frequent. I just hope that when word finally does come out that this is or isn't happening, that instead of looking at how others are doing things, that the networks would reinvent the wheel and not just continue with the status quo, but with different (and cheaper) programming. While the top cable networks are owned by the same companies that own the broadcast networks, that doesn't mean that broadcasters have to sit back and take it like a bitch in heat when it comes to ratings from their lesser counterparts. Yes, broadcast TV has lost viewers to cable and yes cable is making a killing from all of us foolish enough to shell out 100-150 dollars a month to cable companies and from advertisers (don't you love how they make double the profit?), but that doesn't mean broadcast has to take it sitting down. Bringing in cheap shows in order to get some [more] money from an advertiser sounds great on paper, but when the viewers don't bite the new product...you not only lost the stable income, but the loyal viewer. Daytime specifically has been pushed under the bus numerous times to support everything else on a networks schedule (primetime promos during the daytime shows, never a daytime promo during the primetime shows), but I guess it is now following along the same lines Saturday morning cartoons did. The sign of the times indeed.

[SFK]

Seconded, thirded, and fourthed!

PBS' Ghostwriter, Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego, Square One, 3-2-1 Contact, even more shows with scripted material shot in NY that got the hook for computer animated shows.

[Jack]

What I don't understand is why they don't utilize corporate synergy to program daytime, program the block with shows you could re-air on your multiple cable networks and just cycle thru the shows on 6 week cycles with 4-5 originals a week. Getting added revenue from being able to re-air a series on one of their cable networks would offset the cost of developing a new series.

[Vee]

I've said it many times, in many overwrought and arrogant ways, but it is still true: Soaps will be back. One way or another, regular serialized storytelling always comes back. And the hunger is still there, obviously; look at the British soaps, or stuff like Downton Abbey, or the way soap opera has seeped into every aspect of so-called "serious, prestigious" primetime and cable scripted programming.

It may only be back at night, it may be one, three, four days a week, it may be online, it may stream, it may be On Demand, but it will be back. And knowing ABC's backwards management, I would not be at all surprised to see them go the desperate nostalgia route in 10-15 years when most other programming fails, and mount some form of revival for 2 or all of the 3 soaps in some format. Maurice Benard, Steve Burton, Tony, Genie and Susan Lucci will be dragged out of mothballs to christen the ship, so to speak, maybe put in recurring appearances. It will all be back, eventually, somehow. You can't count soap opera out. Too much of what we watch today - scripted and unscripted - what we've always watched, in fact, is built on it.

[Jack]

Well there really isn't much competition in daytime after this. CBS has 2 games shows, 2 soaps (really 1.5), and a talk show NBC has 1 soap a various syndicated content, ABC will have 2 talk shows, 1 soap, and a reality show. It's all really generic and similar. The only stand out is ABC's reality show but thats iffy cause who knows what Frons has lined up. Maybe a second season of "Southern Belles: Louisville" or maybe they'll take a page from the ABC playbook circa 2000 and save the daytime lineup by overplaying a overly dramatic game show in every hour of programming. Or any of ABC's failed attempts at reality shows from primetime. There are worse options.

[Errol]

THIS! This I agree with.

I've always said (and I do mean always) that a soap opera is a serialized drama. Any series with a continuous storyline is a soap opera in my book. This includes Friends (even though it is a comedy) and most definitely the current (and popular) reality-soaps. While reality TV is poorly acted, much of it is still scripted. Heck, wrestling is the most successful soap opera in the history of television. Yes, men and women are fighting for a piece of cheap plastic/metal in order to claim they are the best, but WWE is making billions each and every year from ticket sales, toys, games, appearances, tv shows and much, much more. My all-time favorite storyline was when Triple H "kidnapped" and married Stephanie McMahon on the show only to find out that Stephanie was in fact in on the dubious plan in order to oust her daddy from the company. That was some serious soapy drama. If only our current soaps could pull off the plots, we'd be back in business.

[alphanguy74]

I would love to see that as well. I have to admit, when I'm home during the day, i'm almost always tuned to AntennaTV or PBS create. BTW... LOVE your avatar of Hester Sue. Ketty Lester...

[Vee]

PBS would be smart to do it - once upon a time, it invested in Bill Gunn and Ishmael Reed's all-black avant-garde soap, Personal Problems, in the early '80s, which I discussed in the "Proposed Soaps" thread. I never was clear whether it was meant to be short-lived or a feature or whether it stopped or was discontinued, but for all its nil-budget trappings its stories and naturalistic dialogue, its surreal interludes were more contemporary than anything on soaps today.

[Errol]

Frons' programming ideas since taking oversight of SOAPnet a couple of years back is why I'm afraid for the future of ABC Daytime. He is a business man, but he is not a good programmer. All the shows SOAPnet introduced were cheap and utter crap. Repeats of The O.C. and One Tree Hill, and 20 year old episodes of Beverly Hills, 90210 flood the networks schedule (even today). His idea of Sunday Night Movies sounded great on paper, but he used crappy movies. He should have aired Lifetime movies that included his own people like Jamie Luner, Susan Lucci, etc. Bonehead decision after bonehead decision has placed ABC Daytime in a vulnerable position and Anne Sweeney could give two shits about a lineup that has kept ABC in business through the good times and most definitely the bad times, even while she was not even born or still in school.

I apologize by my lack of professionalism in this thread, but any decision ABC makes will be just another hit that this site must take. While I don't purchase any of the magazines, the loss of any other soap (specifcally AMC/OLTL) will be detrimental to their future. The first to go will be ABC Soaps in Depth, though they tend to be GH heavy anyway, so it wouldn't shock me to see them take this reality show and slap it on the cover and call it a soap (even though technically it would be) and rotate the cover between GH and said unnamed show. Not sure how CBS Soaps in Depth is doing now that they only have two soaps to contend with, but obviously a loss of 2 out of the 3 current ABC soaps would hurt them more.

[Vee]

The problem is that Brian Frons and Barbara Bloom (now deposed) both think they are David O. Selznick and Irving Thalberg. They think they are actual creative personnel, with well-tuned creative minds, and that every pearl from their lips is manna from heaven, dictating genius story after genius story. This was clear when Frons first attempted to re-brand all the soaps in 2003. The fact is these people are management, and not very good management at that. Any idiot could have programmed SOAPNet properly.

[All My Shadows]

I agree with all of this, but unfortunately, there's this idea out there that soaps must be about A, B, and C, because D, E, and F just aren't what soaps are about. It's my favorite example, but gosh darn it, Teen Mom is pure soap, but reality = evil. If one transcribed an episode, put it in script format, scared up a cast and crew, and taped it on a three-walled set, it'd be called "compelling."

[Vee]

I'm not saying you can't have Teen Mom. I'm saying there is no reason not to have both Teen Mom and a better scripted soap in some way, shape or form. Each justifies the other.