It's a strange topic and quite divisive. It's all about opinion. Plus which popularity doesn't mean good. Just like because you don't like it doesn't make it bad. So how does this topic work?

Top 5 of all time

1. ATWT

2.Y&R

3.Search For Tomorrow

4.AMC

5.GH

3 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

Can anyone quantify something so subjective as taste?  If we look at something like Oscar wins and box office, it's still open for debate what would rate as the greatest film. 

Star Wars most certainly did higher numbers than Citizen Kane at the box office, yet Star Wars'  awards are likely limited to the technical categories. 

 

Some of the best heralded pieces of art are not always rated as the best.  For this reason, I'd have a difficult time answering this question in any serious way.  So much goes into the calculus of how a TV show or a film (including timing) performs.  

Also, when it all comes down to it, isn't taste a highly individual metric anyway?

That is the whole point of my approach. Just trying to make it objective vs. subjective. If you tried to remove bias and used numbers, which soap would lead?....

Edited October 9, 20187 yr by Casey008

4 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

Top 5 of all time

1. ATWT

2.Y&R

3.Search For Tomorrow

4.AMC

5.GH

I can agree with this list. 

Just now, Casey008 said:

That is the whole point of my approach. Just trying to make it objective vs. subjective. If you tried to remove bias and used numbers, which soap would lead...

 

Even numbers can be biased (see standardized tests). 

By whose metric are we using to judge merit?  Do awards truly mean anything, really? 

Some of the best films have missed out on awards, only for people to say fifty years down the road that it was robbed/overlooked.  Due to what, politics?

People have tuned into some of the biggest trash TV in droves (O.J. Simpson's car chase rates pretty high in viewing totals) but that doesn't make it good.

 

Even now, we are learning that newspapers and journalists are not totally objective and the judicial system can indeed by biased.

 

11 minutes ago, SteelCity said:

It's a strange topic and quite divisive. It's all about opinion. Plus which popularity doesn't mean good. Just like because you don't like it doesn't make it bad. So how does this topic work?

Just trying to make it as objective as possible. Bias/opinion aside..

1 minute ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

Even numbers can be biased (see standardized tests). 

By whose metric are we using to judge merit?  Do awards truly mean anything, really? 

Some of the best films have missed out on awards, only for people to say fifty years down the road that it was robbed/overlooked.  Due to what, politics?

People have tuned into some of the biggest trash TV in droves (O.J. Simpson's car chase rates pretty high in viewing totals) but that doesn't make it good.

 

Even now, we are learning that newspapers and journalists are not totally objective and the judicial system can indeed by biased.

 

I believe awards and ratings have merit.

2 minutes ago, Casey008 said:

Just trying to make it as objective as possible. Bias/opinion aside..

I believe awards and ratings have merit.

 

Awards have merit, in so far as the industry and money is involved, advertisers love ratings as antiquated as that system has become. The Oscars and Emmys are a bonanza for corporations and businesses that want to sell things.  It's nice that someone recognizes your work, I guess and for some, it can lead to more work and more money but for many, even an Oscar doesn't necessarily lead to anything special.

 

Speaking as an artist, if you're making art with awards and ratings in sight, your project is already in trouble. 

 

If you have taken a course in film criticism, you know that one cannot put bias and opinion aside-- this is a huge part of critiquing art.  It's a given that your personal experience is going to factor into how you view a piece of art.  You take all of that with you in evaluating what you're seeing.  People often gravitate toward what they like, not necessarily what's deemed best for them intellectually, artistically or otherwise.

13 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

Top 5 of all time

1. ATWT

2.Y&R

3.Search For Tomorrow

4.AMC

5.GH

SFT (interesting addition) was a ratings hit in the early 50's (before the daytime Emmy's). So it's tough to judge that aspect.

GL took over the #1 spot in the late 50's, then ATWT started their run.

Okay, back to the OP...what metrics would be relevant?

 

Years on air

Years at #1

Emmy noms

Emmy won percentage 

 

I mean, I can't even come up with that many...

3 minutes ago, Casey008 said:

SFT (interesting addition) was a ratings hit in the early 50's (before the daytime Emmy's). So it's tough to judge that aspect.

GL took over the #1 spot in the late 50's, then ATWT started their run.

IMO SFT was one of the best soaps on air along with the rest of the CBS lineup. I just realized I left out GL. It was great until up to 86 or 87 but for me the soap lost some of its luster due to poor storytelling. I guess it would be #6 on my list. 

Edited October 9, 20187 yr by Soapsuds

37 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

Awards have merit, in so far as the industry and money is involved, advertisers love ratings as antiquated as that system has become. The Oscars and Emmys are a bonanza for corporations and businesses that want to sell things.  It's nice that someone recognizes your work, I guess and for some, it can lead to more work and more money but for many, even an Oscar doesn't necessarily lead to anything special.

 

Speaking as an artist, if you're making art with awards and ratings in sight, your project is already in trouble. 

 

If you have taken a course in film criticism, you know that one cannot put bias and opinion aside-- this is a huge part of critiquing art.  It's a given that your personal experience is going to factor into how you view a piece of art.  You take all of that with you in evaluating what you're seeing.  People often gravitate toward what they like, not necessarily what's deemed best for them intellectually, artistically or otherwise.

 

Apparently, we have a different point of view and mindset. I started the thread with an objective/principles of science method in mind. I love your passion and as a fellow soap fan!

Edited October 9, 20187 yr by Casey008

2 hours ago, titan1978 said:

If we were talking about the people that made these shows though, I have no issue picking Bill Bell as head and shoulders above folks like Monty, Nixon, the Dobson’s, Marland, Falken-Smith, Labine, Curlee, Reilly, etc.  I’ve loved so many of the work by those creating the shows, but I can’t deny the work of Bill Bell, even if his show wasn’t always a favorite of mine.

 

I'm a complete ATWT/Marland/Philips homer....but it's really hard to argue anyone impacted the industry more than Bell. 

35 minutes ago, P.J. said:

Okay, back to the OP...what metrics would be relevant?

 

Years on air

Years at #1

Emmy noms

Emmy won percentage 

 

I mean, I can't even come up with that many...

 

Yes, Emmy nominations/wins (acting/directing/writing), ratings, and years on air. I can't really think of any other objective metrics... Let me know if you think of any..

33 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

IMO SFT was one of the best soaps on air along with the rest of the CBS lineup. I just realized I left out GL. It was great until up to 86 or 87 but for me the soap lost some of its luster due to poor storytelling. I guess it would be #6 on my list. 

 

I am LOL at your signature - the GG quote!

2 hours ago, titan1978 said:

If we just look at cultural impact and ratings it is hard to not get down to GH, ATWT, and Y&R, the three that lead the ratings books longest.

 

AW should belong there, but it had so many more years where it was not at a creative high than the years where it was.

 

The problem is that this is very hard to quantify, and it’s hard not to be swayed by “your” show.  Which is why I would pick GH every time over Y&R, even though I think Bell’s writing is more nuanced and singular, and GH is more an EP’s show than a HW driven show.

 

If we were talking about the people that made these shows though, I have no issue picking Bill Bell as head and shoulders above folks like Monty, Nixon, the Dobson’s, Marland, Falken-Smith, Labine, Curlee, Reilly, etc.  I’ve loved so many of the work by those creating the shows, but I can’t deny the work of Bill Bell, even if his show wasn’t always a favorite of mine.

 

Yes! They all lead decades (ratings-wise). But ATWT wasn't an Emmy sweetheart..It's basically audience vs. the critics..

Edited October 9, 20187 yr by Casey008

Another World, The Edge of Night, The Secret Storm, and controversially Sunset Beach.

My answer (Y&R, AMC) was based not just on awards and viewership, but mainstream popularity that’ll maintain in the annals of daytime television. 

 

It’s hard not to include GH (Luke & Laura; ratings powerhouse ‘79-‘88) and ATWT (the soap EVERY mother or grandmother or great-grandmother watched). 

 

My thought process was the overall mark a show made in daytime history that will be often remembered. For example, B&B has been tops for decades, but someone who used to watch soaps “back in the day” is more likely to remember who Bo & Hope were versus Brooke & Ridge. 

 

(My two all-time faves are DAYS and GL but admittedly I don’t think either deserve the title as ‘Best’) 

 

 

Edited October 9, 20187 yr by Gray Bunny