But at least there's something online for them to judge. Whether or not we agree with the judgments, at least they have something tangible. So, if they like what they see, great! If they don't like what they see, great! I watched the first episode OLTL... After the second, I figured it wasn't my cup of tea and kept it moving. I haven't seen an episode since. Yet I like AMC and watch it every single morning with my cup of tea (see what I did there?) and continue to enjoy it. So am I to be called to the carpet for not giving OLTL a chance before I determined I didn't like it? No! It's just different strokes for different folks!

ETA: However, I will say that I agree with the notion that the "I don't like it and if others don't too, that means they must be doing something wrong" philosophy is lame as hell.

Edited May 8, 201312 yr by R Sinclair

tbh I get it tho the review was way too harsh. These shows cannot rely on the shrinking previous audience. If they are to survive they cannot fanservice, they need to bring in new fans. So having someone who is not a soap fan write the review was fine. That said, if they had stopped and done tons of exposition, it would have sucked for both old fans and new fans. So hopefully the opening episodes were interesting enough to make people WANT to learn what is going on, and in the coming months they will drop SUBTLE hints to educate new viewers. If the reviewer honestly wanted them to open with a recap of the last 40 years, he is crazy and it would have been awful and it would never last or satisfy anyone.

Exactly. Soap opera s a genre works with the trust that audiences will be intrigued enough to want to stick around to find out exactly what's going on.

I wasn't sure where to post this but here is a different perspective:

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/soap-operas-are-dirtier-online-than-on-tv-1.5217197