Jump to content


Marco Dane

The Story of Soaps Primetime Special

Recommended Posts

I'm going to defend Andy on this one and you can drag me if you want, but they did ask him about reality TV and not only did they ask, they decided to include the footage in the final product. Who ever put this together is to blame.

3 minutes ago, Dylan said:

ūüėÖ¬†What's the story with this women?.

I don't know but I was a Harley fan and I checked in on the Guiding Light thread in the Canceleld Soaps section and they were saying not so pleasant things and I was like oh nooo I can't read this. Don't ruin the character for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, titan1978 said:

Oh Andy-  always there to take the credit and the attention.  Never one to take the blame.  Don’t you change.

 

The one thing I would argue about the Housewives (I do not watch, but my mother watches all of them), is that they rarely feature multiple women under the age of 30.  They are filled with women that soap execs and writers have been neglecting on daytime for about 25 years.  It is exploitative and often ridiculous, but they do not ignore an age group that soaps often try to, or at least sideline quite often.

That's a fair point.  I've never watched enough to really be able to fairly comment on them, just that they don't appeal to me.  (And when people suggest they fill the gap left without soaps, it just makes me think that those people didn't watch soaps for most of the same reasons I did.  You know stuff like well written dramatic scenes, deep family relationships over decades, sensitive depictions of controversial social storylines...  If the Housewives franchise is known for these, than I apologize).

And yes--Andy's reaction is so...  Andy.  And it's why so many people find him so obnoxious. 

3 minutes ago, GLATWT88 said:

I'm going to defend Andy on this one and you can drag me if you want, but they did ask him about reality TV and not only did they ask, they decided to include the footage in the final product. Who ever put this together is to blame.

 

The Vulture piece I linked to with the producer does mention she got the idea to pitch this when she was originally going to pitch something about reality shows, and she saw a connection.  So it does seem pretty clear why he was asked...

1 hour ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

 

 Let's not dismiss that aspect.

Thanks for that--you're absolutely right and it is important to acknowledge that.  I jumped unfairly on Sara's comment--and ironically after I made a post where I thought that Eric objecting to the show pointing out how soaps were primarily, initially written for women sorta missed why it was important to stress that.  I guess part of my reaction is it is still undeniable that people (particularly women) going into the workforce played a big part in ratings falling (and probably also why the young student demo became increasingly important).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, EricMontreal22 said:

That's a fair point.  I've never watched enough to really be able to fairly comment on them, just that they don't appeal to me.  (And when people suggest they fill the gap left without soaps, it just makes me think that those people didn't watch soaps for most of the same reasons I did.  You know stuff like well written dramatic scenes, deep family relationships over decades, sensitive depictions of controversial social storylines...  If the Housewives franchise is known for these, than I apologize).

And yes--Andy's reaction is so...  Andy.  And it's why so many people find him so obnoxious. 

The Vulture piece I linked to with the producer does mention she got the idea to pitch this when she was originally going to pitch something about reality shows, and she saw a connection.  So it does seem pretty clear why he was asked...

As annoying as Andy can be, he is able to express himself well and in a way that can at times be inviting and draw you in. His specials on Bravo where he discusses his shows, their impact and how they (the show and castmembers) have evolved over the years is usually really nicely put together. He states he's a soap fan and I believe it and he has talked about soaps before, so I'm sure if asked the right questions, he could have a lot to say.

 

I mean you have the matriarchs of AMC and OLTL representing their shows and you pick Sonny from GH? Really? There were so many things wrong with this.

 

Also, to express something I felt after going through the most recent comments. I think the show did enough with addressing the male audience. I mean there just wasn't time. There were more important things that were glossed over and it did come down to time more than anything (even crappy choices). I think the importance of saying that soaps where made for women by women wasn't an insult at all. Soaps were targeting the female consumer and the fact that they were written largely by women at one time is important to point out especially since most entertainment spaces, many of those that target women, are actually run and conducted by men. To say this space (soaps) that are telling stories about women, their issues, their trials but told from an authentic place I think was spot on. 

Edited by GLATWT88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, EricMontreal22 said:

That's a fair point.  I've never watched enough to really be able to fairly comment on them, just that they don't appeal to me.  (And when people suggest they fill the gap left without soaps, it just makes me think that those people didn't watch soaps for most of the same reasons I did.  You know stuff like well written dramatic scenes, deep family relationships over decades, sensitive depictions of controversial social storylines...  If the Housewives franchise is known for these, than I apologize).

And yes--Andy's reaction is so...  Andy.  And it's why so many people find him so obnoxious. 

The Vulture piece I linked to with the producer does mention she got the idea to pitch this when she was originally going to pitch something about reality shows, and she saw a connection.  So it does seem pretty clear why he was asked...

Thanks for that--you're absolutely right and it is important to acknowledge that.  I jumped unfairly on Sara's comment--and ironically after I made a post where I thought that Eric objecting to the show pointing out how soaps were primarily, initially written for women sorta missed why it was important to stress that.  I guess part of my reaction is it is still undeniable that people (particularly women) going into the workforce played a big part in ratings falling (and probably also why the young student demo became increasingly important).

 

That's a fair point.

I wish that soaps had pushed harder for some sort of way to count delayed viewing back in the VCR era. Just imagine how many viewers were pitched because VCR viewings didn't register back then. I don't know how it could've been done or if the technology was even there (although A/B switches were part of the technology back then) but I wonder how those ratings would've been different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, GLATWT88 said:

As annoying as Andy can be, he is able to express himself well and in a way that can at times be inviting and draw you in. His specials on Bravo where he discusses his shows, their impact and how they (the show and castmembers) have evolved over the years is usually really nicely put together. He states he's a soap fan and I believe it and he has talked about soaps before, so I'm sure if asked the right questions, he could have a lot to say.

 

I mean you have the matriarchs of AMC and OLTL representing their shows and you pick Sonny from GH? Really? There were so many things wrong with this.

 

Also, to express something I felt after going through the most recent comments. I think the show did enough with addressing the male audience. I mean there just wasn't time. There were more important things that were glossed over and it did come down to time more than anything (even crappy choices). I think the importance of saying that soaps where made for women by women wasn't an insult at all. Soaps were targeting the female consumer and the fact that they were written largely by women at one time is important to point out especially since most entertainment spaces, many of those that target women, are actually run and conducted by men. To say this space (soaps) that are telling stories about women, their issues, their trials but told from an authentic place I think was spot on. 

Oh I know Andy was a huge soap fan--the anecdote Susan Lucci told in her youtube interview last week confirms that even more. 

Yes, that's exactly how I feel about people like Eric (Braeden, not me :P ) griping that they made it sound like only women watched.  And I say that as someone who has, since I was 11 or 12, spent a lot of time trying to dispel stereotypes that men don't watch soaps.  But I do feel that sometimes when it is acknowledged that there's a male audience, it comes off as sort of like "See, these shows do have worth!  Men watch them as well!" 

34 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

That's a fair point.

I wish that soaps had pushed harder for some sort of way to count delayed viewing back in the VCR era. Just imagine how many viewers were pitched because VCR viewings didn't register back then. I don't know how it could've been done or if the technology was even there (although A/B switches were part of the technology back then) but I wonder how those ratings would've been different.

Completely agreed.  Obviously so many people watching soaps on video tape affected their ratings (and exposure to their sponsors, or lack thereof) more than with primetime shows.  I know that in the early 90s numerous articles would quote that All My Children was the most video taped program in North America and I suspect other soaps weren't far behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just started watching it.  The clips are clearly pulled from a secondary source, and are hard to watch because of it.  Just like the soaps today- this product was rushed out  and could have used some more time and care.

 

As for reality tv-  I think that while everything is serialized these days, I do agree that reality tv took the place of daytime.  I don’t really enjoy or watch most of it (I enjoy stuff like British Bake Off, Project Runway).  But the Kardashians have been on forever.  If you watch them, you have seen them grow up, marry, divorce, have families, fight, etc.  At their peak, you had the main show and then spinoffs with certain family members, so they were on tv like half the year.

 

I think what people may mistake is that they are comparing one show against one show.  I think the soap mentality is not necessarily that they are following the same show, but the same types of people across lots of shows all year long.  And people do follow them like they used to follow soaps.

 

My mother watches all the Housewives, and the spin offs. ¬†Yes it‚Äôs not the same as watching GH M-F, 52 weeks a year. ¬†But it is the same type of people and storytelling all year long as various seasons air at the same time over the whole year now. ¬†She can tell me their backstories, etc. ¬†it is a soap type of following to her, and to a lot of people. ¬†Plus their lives continue on social media, so your favorite ‚Äúcharacter‚ÄĚ is never really off the air.

 

I think money is by far the issue failing these shows.  They need more money to put out a better product, but because of how much they cost the stakes are too high to do that.

Edited by titan1978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VCR recordings negatively effecting the ratings is something that I never considered. It makes a lot of sense, though. Soap Net was an attempt to accommodate viewers who worked in the daytime, but it came along too late. Pre-internet the networks would had to have used paper surveys among VCR surveys to collect data and that would have been tedious, but probably worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes, plenty of men watch.  I did!  But people like Braeden being upset the special focused of female viewers and the traditions of women watching soaps is ridiculous.  The vast majority of their audience is, was, and always will be women.  And there is nothing wrong with that!

 

Its that 1990’s mentality of being ashamed of what soaps were that contributed just as much as OJ to killing soaps.  The people running them got so embarrassed and tried many things to unsoap them.

 

All Braeden has to do is remember any public appearance he went on when his show was getting over a 5 in the household ratings.  I bet those audiences were 90% women.

 

Andy is getting heat because of Andy.  Whether he means it or not, he does come across as smug and superior in his comments about the death of the genre as it existed.  He’s just that kind of guy, always has been.  Dishy, gossipy, and quick with a burn.

Edited by titan1978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EricMontreal22 said:

 

I mean I agree with you, but I can't blame him for sticking around in his job at all.  Especially with so little alternatives to work in the industry--I hate to say it but I doubt I would behave any differently in his shoes.

 

It's a tough industry and you do what you can to get by, I'm sure, but if I was a writer on two soaps where a producer puts out myriad anti-gay storylines (I see he was also at GH when they had Brad sexually harassing and attempting to sexually assault straight men), I don't think I could go on TV talking about the Billy Douglas story. If I did I'd probably just say it's unfortunate soaps never again managed a story with that type of sensitivity. 

1 hour ago, titan1978 said:

I just started watching it.  The clips are clearly pulled from a secondary source, and are hard to watch because of it.  Just like the soaps today- this product was rushed out  and could have used some more time and care.

 

As for reality tv-  I think that while everything is serialized these days, I do agree that reality tv took the place of daytime.  I don’t really enjoy or watch most of it (I enjoy stuff like British Bake Off, Project Runway).  But the Kardashians have been on forever.  If you watch them, you have seen them grow up, marry, divorce, have families, fight, etc.  At their peak, you had the main show and then spinoffs with certain family members, so they were on tv like half the year.

 

I think what people may mistake is that they are comparing one show against one show.  I think the soap mentality is not necessarily that they are following the same show, but the same types of people across lots of shows all year long.  And people do follow them like they used to follow soaps.

 

My mother watches all the Housewives, and the spin offs. ¬†Yes it‚Äôs not the same as watching GH M-F, 52 weeks a year. ¬†But it is the same type of people and storytelling all year long as various seasons air at the same time over the whole year now. ¬†She can tell me their backstories, etc. ¬†it is a soap type of following to her, and to a lot of people. ¬†Plus their lives continue on social media, so your favorite ‚Äúcharacter‚ÄĚ is never really off the air.

 

I think money is by far the issue failing these shows.  They need more money to put out a better product, but because of how much they cost the stakes are too high to do that.

 

The soaps were already being abandoned by the networks long before the Housewives shows took off - those shows have also lost a huge amount of support in a relatively short space of time (much faster than the soaps did). There was much more commitment to a soap because of the 5 episode a week format - most of the viewers who watch Housewives shows tend to hate watch and don't invest as much. It is an interesting study in its own right but comparing them to soaps just makes them look bad. If Andy Cohen wasn't such a petty, nasty, delusional figure, he would have known that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, titan1978 said:

I just started watching it.  The clips are clearly pulled from a secondary source, and are hard to watch because of it.  Just like the soaps today- this product was rushed out  and could have used some more time and care.

 

As for reality tv-  I think that while everything is serialized these days, I do agree that reality tv took the place of daytime.  I don’t really enjoy or watch most of it (I enjoy stuff like British Bake Off, Project Runway).  But the Kardashians have been on forever.  If you watch them, you have seen them grow up, marry, divorce, have families, fight, etc.  At their peak, you had the main show and then spinoffs with certain family members, so they were on tv like half the year.

 

I think what people may mistake is that they are comparing one show against one show.  I think the soap mentality is not necessarily that they are following the same show, but the same types of people across lots of shows all year long.  And people do follow them like they used to follow soaps.

 

My mother watches all the Housewives, and the spin offs. ¬†Yes it‚Äôs not the same as watching GH M-F, 52 weeks a year. ¬†But it is the same type of people and storytelling all year long as various seasons air at the same time over the whole year now. ¬†She can tell me their backstories, etc. ¬†it is a soap type of following to her, and to a lot of people. ¬†Plus their lives continue on social media, so your favorite ‚Äúcharacter‚ÄĚ is never really off the air.

 

I think money is by far the issue failing these shows.  They need more money to put out a better product, but because of how much they cost the stakes are too high to do that.

I agree with you--and I think that's a good point about following these people--and it being similar that extent.  I just wonder how many former soap watchers watch something like Kardashians.  In my experience, not many--but that's my personal experience.  I've seen the examples where it does seem to be true online.

As for using youtube footage--it could be that this was rushed, but honestly that seems to be (I hate this term which I always hear now) the new normal.  All those CNN decade by decade documentaries use youtube footage, the talk shows do, the news does...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, EricMontreal22 said:

I agree with you--and I think that's a good point about following these people--and it being similar that extent.  I just wonder how many former soap watchers watch something like Kardashians.  In my experience, not many--but that's my personal experience.  I've seen the examples where it does seem to be true online.

As for using youtube footage--it could be that this was rushed, but honestly that seems to be (I hate this term which I always hear now) the new normal.  All those CNN decade by decade documentaries use youtube footage, the talk shows do, the news does...

 

It wasn't rushed. They asked me to provide clips when I was contacted in September because they were having trouble with some stubborn people at the networks and studios. I had to kindly tell them I couldn't help them since A) Soap Opera Network isn't, B.) has never been, and C) shouldn't be confused with, SOAPnet. What they could get looks bad by comparison, but when you see it knowing the hurdles they had to get through, I give them a pass on this one.

 

As for former soap watchers watching reality shows like "The Real Housewives" and "Keeping Up with the Kardashian," while I do not count myself among them, I can attest that it is A LOT.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...