Jump to content

Ratings from the 80's


Recommended Posts

  • Members
NOTE ON SEPTEMBER 1990 PREEMPTIONS:
 
Until I went to type them today, I forgot that I still have not received 3 issues from September 1990 and 1 issue from March 1991. Those are available, so we just have to wait on getting those 4. Unfortunately, the September 1990 time frame is just when the TV season changes. So, I can't compare the "# of telecasts" from the 9/3/90 issue to the 10/1/90 issue. So, the preemptions for the weeks of 9/10, 9/17 and 9/24/90 will still be a mystery for the time being, hopefully ready by the end of the year At least the "missing" week (for now) from March 1991 can have the telecasts compared to figure out if any full preemptions happened that week.
 
While ABC and NBC considered the week of 10/1/90 the "season premiere" week (each soap has only 5 telecasts listed in that book), CBS must have considered the week of 9/17/90 the "season premiere" week, so we do know that ATWT, BB, GL and YR all aired 10 episodes for the weeks of 9/17/90 and 9/24/90 (since they are all listed as 15 telecasts in the 10/1 book, except for GL, which has 14 telecasts listed, but did not have a rated episode on 10/5/90).
 
For now, I will use the Soap Opera Weekly ratings/shares for the weeks of 9/10, 9/17 and 9/24/90 and update the charts with the affiliates/clearances/preemptions when those books are ready.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

In a way, it probably was for the best that ABC didn't give her that schedule.  As I've said elsewhere, LOVING was always mediocre to me.  It's one thing to land a cushy time slot between two tentpole shows like AMC and OLTL.  To keep the audience from tuning out when neither was on, however, you needed a show with good writing; and LOVING, IMO, never came close to being that.  If anything, placing LOVING at 1:30 would have jeopardized OLTL; and as it was, even when OLTL was besting AMC and even GH in the ratings, ABC *still* regarded it as the proverbial red-headed stepchild.

If I had had my druthers, AMC would have led off the day's lineup, followed by RH, OLTL, GH and finally, LOVING or another half-hour soap at 4/3c.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Starting off Loving at 11:30AM doomed it from the very beginning.  Ryan's Hope was already fading in 1982 and 1983. Historically, RH was given AMC timeslot at 1:00 PM when it premiered in 1975. AMC moved up to 12:30PM. Agnes fought the time slot change for AMC and was very angry with ABC. AMC's ratings went down and RH lost ground in the 1PM. Then AMC got the spot back in 1977 then went to an hour. Loving was an average show but was its writing any worse than Capitol? or RH? or Search or AW? No. 

And having Restless crush RH for years ..that did not affect AMC??? Of course it did...and Restless beat AMC after a while vs. when AMC and Restless were head to head it was an even match. RH was an awful lead-in for AMC and so was Loving. SO placing Loving before OLTL might have hurt but not as much I think.

ABC should have given Agnes what she wanted. 

 

Ryan's Hope already had many chances and RH would have tanked against Days and ATWT.

Edited by JoeCool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wouldn't say thrive, but it probably would have helped with clearance. By the end of its run, RH was clearing about 80% of markets compared to about 97 percent in the early 80s. Capitol and Bold both benefitted from being hammocked between established soaps. While neither achieved the ratings success of their lead ins, it definitely helped. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Agreed. Capitol was canceled not for its ratings but because CBS wanted another Bill Bell soap.

Ryan's Hope had its best days in the 1970s and by the time the early 80s came around, RH was falling in the ratings. Ryan's Hope should have been canceled in 1983. Loving replaces it. AMC moves to 12:30PM. Loving at 1:30 then followed by OLTL at 2 and GH at 3ET. ABC owned RH by then in 1983. The Labines did not want to expand to an hour when ABC wanted it in the late 70s. RH's time was up by 1983 because Restless crushed it in 1983.

Edited by JoeCool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

@JoeCool   & @GLATWT88  Thank you both for replying. I have a sorta fascination with ABC not tucking half hour soaps in between AMC & OLTL. I specifically wish that they had done so with PC. And that one oddball time PC's ratings jump amazes me. I know when Wendy Riche conceived of it, her thought was to begin & end the day with the hospital. But I always thought it should have had AMC as its lead-in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In the late 70's, Fred Silverman and Jackie Smith created the 3 hour block of 1 hour shows back to back and ABC never wanted to break it up. ABC should have shook up its schedule. because CBS shook up the schedule once Restless went to an hour and eventually Restless went to Number 1 and CBS Daytime went to Number 1.

 

As for PC - it was doomed going up against Restless just like RH and Loving were destroyed by Restless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

ABC Daytime was too rigid in its scheduling and really paid the price in the 1980s. Clearances really doomed RH, Loving and PC and of course Edge. ABC never really recovered once Restless moved to 12:30PM and ABC was not aggressive in trying to lessen Restless. RH overstayed its welcome on ABC and ABC starting Loving at 11:30AM doomed it from the start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

True. ABC did very little to compete with YR and it ultimately hurt them in the end. Having AMC go up against YR's full hour when it was at its strongest could have taken a bit of steam from YR's engine, especially since AMC remained quite strong ratings wise until the mid-90s.

Instead, ABC decided to have weak soaps or debut new soaps in that very difficult timeslot against YR. It was almost as if YR had a whole half hour without much direct competition to establish itself and gain and grow an audience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Loving really was a useless addition to ABC daytime. They had a full schedule of soaps as it was, so there was no viable timeslot, it was ahalf hour at the point that all the 30 min shows were struggling and it brought little to the table in terms of innovation or dynamic storytelling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

ABC approached Agnes Nixon about creating a 30 minute daytime drama in the early 80s. Why ABC wanted it is beyond me. Agnes always thought Loving was to replace either Edge or RH and she did not want Loving to premiere at 1130AM. RH and Edge were at the bottom of the ratings in the early 1980s and by 1983 were awful ratings wise. ABC should have cancelled either RH or Edge or both. ABC misplayed their hand badly.

Edited by JoeCool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

WEEKDAY DAYTIME TV SPECIALS (4/6/81-8/30/81):

Note: Confirmed specials for the week of 8/24/81-8/28/81 are not available. However, checking newspaper listings for that week, there were no specials scheduled to air at all that week, so at most, the only rated specials for this week would be breaking news specials.

Please register in order to view this content

In an update to the Daytime TV Specials list, from January 1980-August 1981, so far there have been three sets of specials that aired for an entire week:

Joey and Redhawk on CBS from 8/18/80-8/22/80.
Real Life Stories on CBS from 4/13/81-4/17/81.
Wedding Day on NBC from 6/8/81-6/12/81. (This is the only one to have been given an average rating of its 5 episodes).
Edited by JAS0N47
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Wedding Day was a trial series. Bill and Susan Hayes were involved in some way. I can't recall the details but they wrote about in their SOD column. I think it aired in the morning 10am? They followed a couple through wedding preparations culminating with an onscreen wedding.

Does anyone know more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy