Jump to content

Ratings from the 80's


Paul Raven

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 8/30/82-9/3/82 & 9/6/82-9/10/82:

Please register in order to view this content

FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 9/13/82-9/17/82 & 9/20/82-9/24/82:

Edited by JAS0N47
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Unless the info is incorrect or there’s another preemption coming up between the rest of September-December we didn’t know about,  that messes things up a bit

Please register in order to view this content

 we long assumed 1982 was   the first year they preempted the Friday in September for tennis as well. 

Edited by YRfan23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

When there's a "tie" in the ratings (such as 9/24/1982) when Guiding Light and The Young & the Restless both have a 7.7, I'm inclined to think the one with the higher "share" (Y&R's 31 share versus GL's 27 share) should be listed first.  If both shows are tied in households and in shares, then I think they should be alphabetized.  

That's just my two cents, and I'm not complaining.  I'm thrilled to have the weekly data, and I appreciate the work you put into these!  

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Here you go!

Please register in order to view this content

I'm glad you're not complaining, since this is a lot of work to do!! 52 weeks x 10 years = 520 charts!

My first sort is by rating, the secondary sort is by program title, so any programs tied in ratings will be listed alphabetically, not by share.

That was me. I think the error happened because the chart said ABC soaps aired TU-F and CBS soaps aired TU-TH. I probably just mistakenly read it as TU-F for CBS. So, as we know from earlier this week when I misread a 6 for an 8, that mistakes will happen, but I always do try my best. I would hope my accuracy would still be in the 98 to 99 percent range when I have completed all 520 weeks for 1980-1989!   I have posted the corrected chart above.

Here's the chart where I just misread TU-TH as TU-F...

Edited by JAS0N47
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thanks!  Like I said in the past, any possible mistakes anyone sees, please bring them to my attention, since I want the records to be totally accurate!

The rest of 1982 I see only two more CBS preemptions, on Thanksgiving and day after Thanksgiving.

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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.



  • Recent Posts

    •   Like I said I wasn’t talking about characterization. It makes sense that Dani is in denial. However literally no one in the real world would accuse someone of faking a pregnancy. Why? Because it’s just not feasible. What is Dani supposed to expect from Hayley—that she’ll be hiding a pillow under her shirt 24/7? Come on. The accusation has no legs, and that’s exactly why nobody would ever go there. A far more plausible accusation—one that actually has been made for centuries—is that someone might lie about who the father is. Dani only vaguely hinted at that, but at least that angle would make some narrative sense. I’d go for a coworking space that would be home to these small businesses like Kat and Chelsea’s bag startup (the whole police station trope feels like copaganda to me)
    • I guess RTPP looked worse because it followed Another World, but it's a shame they didn't give it more time especially considering how the shows that were put on following it fared.
    • Please register in order to view this content

    • Durkin was awful. The writing did her no favors, but she was all wrong for the part, lacking the mix of mystery, steeliness, sorrow and hesitancy that defined Victoria. I still have the awful memory of Adam lugging her around like a rag doll. She looked much more like one of the Blue Whale dancing extras than Victoria. And her voice... Maybe I am too harsh. With that said, Curtis didn't seem as bothered. I see from a fan review mentioning Barnabas & Company that Durkin was asked to return for Victoria's final episodes and declined as she had a Christmas trip to Europe with her husband planned and wasn't interested in just a few appearances.  I refuse to believe Victoria actually died during the Leviathan storyline. If Barnabas and Angelique could come back 8 times, she could come back a few.
    • It's a shame she only appeared in three episodes for the purpose of being written out - I thought she was quite good in the little we saw. I liked her vibe better than Durkin that never seemed to quite capture Victoria as a character.
    • He did a lot of romance novel covers, so that might've just been enough for them to get their panties in a twist.
    • Pre-TGIF, ABC most successful 1980s Friday 8 pm comedy I'd say was Webster. Full House wasn't a hit its first two seasons but it started showing growth in its third season which overlapped with the launch of TGIF. Funny thing is, Full House became a Top 10 show with the 1991/92 move to Tuesday.
    • Oakland Tribune, 14 July 1985   AW is another show with Schenkel at helm By Connie Passalacqua For the most part, dictators of South American banana republics enjoy better reputations than executive producers of daytime soap operas. Total authority is vested in these producers, who can kill off a character (thus firing an actor) with a stroke of a pen, or completely change life in his or her soap opera dominion (both in its fictional locale and backstage at the studio) on any kind of whim.  Most rule despotically, inspiring fear in their actors and writers. Which inevitably surfaces on the screen and subtracts from a show's quality. Then there's Stephen Schenkel who became executive producer of Another World last fall. He's been described by one of his actresses as "a teddy bear." He has noticeably improved the show, mostly because his natural warmth encourages backstage cohesiveness, and he believes in personally nurturing his staff and cast. 'I like to be supportive', he said.' I like to generate a certain amount of enthusiasm. I love actors and writers and technical people. And I like to laugh..  ' Schenkel said that most of the factors that have led to the shows improved ratings existed before he took over. There were well defined characters, outstanding writers and excellent production values, he explains. 'These things were in place but needed to be stimulated. There wasn't a lot of excitement. What really was missing was an adequate story. We added Gillian Spencer as a writer. (she also plays Daisy on All My Children), who's wonderful, and it just coalesced. The writers energy and commitment to the show began to give it an emotional intensity and some real passion within the characters." Schenkel, a former ABC programming executive who helped develop Ryan's Hope, is a strong believer in stressing romantic and comedy elements in soap operas. AW is also one of the only soaps with an established group of comic characters, including Wallingford (Brent Collins) and Lily Mason (Jackee , Harry). Schenkel raves about the talents of all his actors, and even has something good to say about the Brooklyn location of the shows studio, which most of his Manhattan-oriented staff loathe. I like the people here. I like to walk down the street and feel their energies, he said. He also violateda soap opera no-no, ' inviting actors and writers to the same party. "Everyone got to know one another, he said. And I didn't get any complaints about actors ' begging for story lines, he said. 
    • Since it's pride month.

      Please register in order to view this content

         
    • National City Star-News, 5 May 1977 TV topics by Peter Blazi Lear’s ‘All that Glitters’—doesn’t The best thing that can be said about Norman Lear’s newest soap opera“All That Glitters” is that it comes on so late at night most people will miss it. Role reversal is supposed to be the big draw, with women the breadwinners, mainly executives of a huge conglomerate. The men either fuss with the housework or fidget at the office as secretaries to their bawdy bosses. A female fantasyland? I doubt it. While the role reversal idea has some possibilities, the show pushes too hard for laughs and winds up with raucous females and effete males. A confident, independent woman is indeed a sight to behold and attract, but femininity need not be sacrificed. Unlike Lear’s “Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman,” "Glitters” doesn’t, but you’ve got to give him credit for trying. Today’s experimental comedy is what tomorrow’s hits are made of. Better luck next time, Norman. (“All That Glitters” can be seen weekday evenings at 11 p.m. on Channel 6.) .
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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