Quite frankly, if the soaps were canceled 100 years from now you and others would make this same unfounded claim. I don't think that anything was "expedited." Better writing and casting may have made the soaps have better quality, but nothing could change the fact that our society has changed and the genre simply no longer appeals to the audience like it used to. The soaps lasted a very long time and were going right about now regardless. MarkH used post graphs showing the ratings over the years and they showed that, with the exception of a few peaks and sharp dips, the decline was consistent and it was clear that the end was nigh. Yet most of the posters here act as if the decline suddenly happened recently, under Frons.

All TV ratings are down consistently from where they were years ago. The difference is in what is relevant, what changes with the times. Soaps used to do that. People cared about making the effort. No one has cared about making an effort with soaps in about ten years, if not longer, and ultimately, even the most patient viewers gave up.

We could look at a graph from 1960 or 1970 and say, "Wow, daytime was doomed from the start," but they still continued to make a lot of profit for as long as the networks actually cared about fixing them. That's why ABC brought Gloria Monty in as a last minute, expensive fix for GH, instead of canceling it in favor of Jaye P. Morgan and the Galloping Gourmet hosting an encounter group.

Edited April 20, 201114 yr by CarlD2

Quite frankly, if the soaps were canceled 100 years from now you and others would make this same unfounded claim. I don't think that anything was "expedited." Better writing and casting may have made the soaps have better quality, but nothing could change the fact that our society has changed and the genre simply no longer appeals to the audience like it used to. The soaps lasted a very long time and were going right about now regardless. MarkH used post graphs showing the ratings over the years and they showed that, with the exception of a few peaks and sharp dips, the decline was consistent and it was clear that the end was nigh. Yet most of the posters here act as if the decline suddenly happened recently, under Frons.

+1

It's a simple fact people completely ignore. IMO, I don't think the writing or production has anything to do with the decline of soap. I agree with you 100 percent it has to do with the changes in society. Look at primetime on the networks. It's basically the same trend.

Edited April 20, 201114 yr by MontyB

I also think that in recent times (not counting the leveling off of the era when soaps were big pop culture items - I mean more like 1996 or 1997 on) the steepest drops were under executives like Frons, or Bloom, MADD, etc. Even during the time when the biggest changes in society were happening, soaps held on. Women didn't suddenly leave home, get cable TV, or get their kids a TV in the last ten years, no matter what Frons and his cohorts say. They gave up because soaps told them to go away and never come back. For me it all goes back to even before Frons came to ABC, to when you started having so many ugly stories and plotless soaps and favoritism and propping, vanishing of minorities and a female point of view, etc.

Edited April 20, 201114 yr by CarlD2

I think he is a lot of people's first choice. Not everybody's obviously but the guy has some pretty rabid fans. In fact, for years I was one of them. I'd say RH is easily in the list of top five requested returns. Perhaps even top 3. Of course, there was a time when SH/Marty was on that list too.

IMO, RH is back for a number of reasons: 1.) The show has been chasing him for years. Frons would feed babies to stray dogs to get/keep one of his faves. 2.) RH needs the money. 3.) OLTL is staying true to its brand as the rape soap; and 4.) He's a white male. Does anyone think you'll see the return of RJ, Layla, Rachel or Lindsay? Nope.

He's definitely got some crazy fans who would watch, but I meant that he wouldn't be many people's sentimental first choice, such as an Andrea Evans or a Michael Storm or a Judith Light. Howarth is being brought back strictly to get the ratings up. ABC must be hoping beyond hope for a ratings increase with him back, which I can definitely see happening, to get as many viewers in place to sample the Revolution. If the OLTL cancellation has been in the works for a while, that's the only reason I can see getting him back. Also there's the possibility he made some deal to move to over to GH when the show dies, a la Tom Eplin with AW & ATWT.

+1

It's a simple fact people completely ignore. IMO, I don't think the writing or production has anything to do with the decline of soap. I agree with you 100 percent it has to do with the changes in society. Look at primetime on the networks. It's basically the same trend.

If it were changes in society I think it would have started much earlier, and more severely - things got worse and worse in the last 15 years, last 10 years, with ratings, and I don't think society has changed that seriously in this timeframe.

There are also some primetime shows that can still command a fairly hefty audience, even if it's not what it used to be. Soaps are totally unable, IMO because of souring of the brand, thanks to the awful product.

Edited April 20, 201114 yr by CarlD2

ABC must be hoping beyond hope for a ratings increase with him back, which I can definitely see happening, to get as many viewers in place to sample the Revolution. If the OLTL cancellation has been in the works for a while, that's the only reason I can see getting him back.

Unless Roger Howarth plans to be a regular contributor to "(Prince &) The Revolution," I almost guarantee the ratings or fans won't "carry over," for lack of a better word.

Given his well-established rapport with OLTL's cast, I believe Frank Valentini was chiefly responsible for RH's return; and if he was, that means either he was kept in the dark as to his bosses' plans, or he knew and he thought this would be a last-ditch effort to spare OLTL.

I was really hoping more people would pull out today...

I was really hoping more people would pull out today...

I think the dust has settled. I think Hoover will be the only one of course I could be wrong.

I noticed that The View didn't even mention it during the show today.

Edited April 20, 201114 yr by Soapsuds

Catherine Hickland has a new blog entry about the cancellation:

http://www.catherinehickland.blogspot.com/

Here's part of it...

“The ratings kept declining” he will spin. And I say

“Yes, well that was the plan, wasn’t it?” Isn’t that what you have been doing with all of your character assassinating and lame story telling? Isn’t that what you’ve been doing micromanaging your producers, writers, and staff to insanity? Business 101 teaches that you hire super competent people and let them do their job. Control freaks find this nearly impossible, which is why they ultimately fail. Its pure arrogance to think that you know what the audience will accept on shows that they knew far, far better than you. They didn’t accept mediocrity, and for that, the viewers were punished? What’s wrong with this picture?

Actually, How he stays employed is a mystery… however life is funny, and karma is not just a theory. It may not be today and it may not be tomorrow , but he has some karma coming, that’s for sure. SO many people hurt under his tenure.

I fcking LOVE Catheriine Hickland....

I fcking LOVE Catheriine Hickland....

Hell to the yes! I second that!

Here's yet another idea for a replacement series:

THE WOO - Young men (and women!) who are unlucky in love try and capture the hearts of long-standing crushes, relying on tried-and-true techniques (such as stalking) as well as a whole panel of love and romance experts, including Dr. Drew Pinsky, comedienne Carol Leifer and Iyanla "Gurl, You Ain't Ready!" Vanzant. Hosted by "All My Children"'s Cameron Mathison.

I really don't give a sh!t about Hickland and what she's saying. Where was she before these shows were canceled and she was off contract and had nothing left to lose?

That's right, saying nothing about Frons and the state of these shows. Bitch is just bitter because it means she'll never return to OLTL at this point.

Actually, How he stays employed is a mystery…

The same way you stay unemployed Catherine.

Catherine Hickland has a new blog entry about the cancellation:

http://www.catherinehickland.blogspot.com/

Here's part of it...

“The ratings kept declining” he will spin. And I say

“Yes, well that was the plan, wasn’t it?” Isn’t that what you have been doing with all of your character assassinating and lame story telling? Isn’t that what you’ve been doing micromanaging your producers, writers, and staff to insanity? Business 101 teaches that you hire super competent people and let them do their job. Control freaks find this nearly impossible, which is why they ultimately fail. Its pure arrogance to think that you know what the audience will accept on shows that they knew far, far better than you. They didn’t accept mediocrity, and for that, the viewers were punished? What’s wrong with this picture?

Actually, How he stays employed is a mystery… however life is funny, and karma is not just a theory. It may not be today and it may not be tomorrow , but he has some karma coming, that’s for sure. SO many people hurt under his tenure.

THIS is what I said all along killed ABC Daytime: Brian Frons and his micromanaging of every show. And now that's he's destroyed the soaps, he blames it on changing viewer habits. Yeah, because they didn't like the sh*t you trying to feed them.

What an utter tool that man is.