Jump to content

Highest Rated Episodes/Weeks of Each Show?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

 

 

It was given attention because it was first time GL beat GH in the ratings in five years. Going back based on what I have seen, GL was considered #3 for the month of August and was #2 for the for the month of September. The height of the Barbados story along with the intros of India & Roxie is what I’ve seen usually cited for GL going to #1.

Edited by soapfan770
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Actually Entertainment Tonight reported about Guiding Light’s ratings in July 1984. ET gave the impression GL was number one overall. That said, ET often had inaccurate reporting. In spring 1982, ET announced NBC was cancelling Texas only to retract the story the next day.

And Beth and Lujack. They were featured in the July 1984 ET report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

From Jason 47. Days ratings around the time of Steve and Kayla's wedding.

7/25/88........1.......8.1........26
8/8/88..........2.......8.0........25
8/15/88........2.......7.5........24
8/22/88........2*......7.4........24
9/5/88..........5.......6.6........24

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

LOL I had wondered about that. One thing I left out was Hilary Bauer’s death, but that came after the ET report had already aired. 

Still nice to know GL did hit #1 in 1979, something I’ve never had seen before or mentioned.
 

Anything about Victor & Nikki getting 20+ million viewers for their 1984 wedding on Y&R?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Do you know what week her heaven storyline happened? It looks like OLTL did in fact go to number 1 (tie) for one week in 1987 that I was able to find...it may be a week that isn't available, tho. I will say that OLTL did have several weeks at number 3 and a few at number 2 throughout 1987. 

 

Please register in order to view this content

Edited by GLATWT88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Let me share the website. I honestly just stumbled upon it today and it's a great resource. I just didn't know where to post it so I could share with everyone. I will say for those of you who posted questions about OLTL, it is very possible that OLTL may have had days where it was the number 1 soap,because it did have many weeks where it ranked 2nd or 3rd in 1987 and 1988. Now, how anyone would've been able to get ahold of that exact information for daily numbers in the late 80s, I'm not completely sure -unless they worked for the networks or nielsen. The magazines I found usually just list the ratings for the week. 

 

Here's the website for those of you interested: 

https://daytimeroyaltyonline.com/vintage-voldemort-news-tidbits-t16990.html

Edited by GLATWT88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's definitely a nice reference, wish more was persevered and easily accessible for other magazines as well.

 

I wish we did have more conclusive information for the Steve and Betsy wedding. Overall, ATWT did well in 1983/84. The articles I read from 1983 and 1984 for ATWT confirm that the couple was definitely popular with viewers and that their relationship did help boost ATWT ratings. ATWT saw yearly increases the 2 years Meg was on. Also, the 1980s ratings pretty much confirm that even though GH was the most popular soap throughout the majority of the 1980s overall, it wasn't unlikely that a soap could dethrone it from the top spot for a week or more. So while I believe it may be possible that Steve and Betsy's wedding could have scored ATWT a number 1 for the week or day or even just the timeslot, I am finding it hard to believe it actually had 20 million viewers. I'm not saying it didn't, because I don't have proof otherwise, but considering all the articles from 1984 I've seen written up on the wedding, none of them mention this incredible feat. I haven't seen a mention of it from a reliable source from that time period or with any actual proof which makes me believe this misinformation started or eventually found it's way onto blogs, websites, and forums. Maybe someone heard that ATWT had a 20 share for the week and thought it meant 20 million. Maybe someday someone could find published ratings for that week. 

Edited by GLATWT88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I still think that misinformation was spread primarily from Schemering’s Encyclopedia, and everyone else just ran with it. I believe he calls it out and that was published over 30 years ago.

 

The ratings from the 80’s also makes it clear that Y&R’s rise to #1 wasn’t totally unexpected as it wasn’t unusual for the show to have stints at #1 before they took the position for good at the end of the decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Thanks for posting! This, along with Jason47's info seems to show DAYS' highest rating with an 8.1.... Though not their highest Nielsen number (they got 9's in the 70's), but the overall total viewers may be significantly higher? 

 

What a continuing mystery, all these claims of high ratings and being No. 1 for so many soaps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, that first part is somewhat true. A household rating is the percentage of tv homes that tuned into a particular program. The weight of a household point is adjusted according the number of tv households and these numbers have continued to grow, which means that the weight of a point has also continued to grow. Let me give you an example

 

Y&R scored a 7.0 rating in HH in 1982. Each household point in 1982 was equivalent to 729,000 homes. This would mean that on average 5.1 million TV homes were tuned into Y&R for that hour.

 

Let's say Y&R also scored a 7.0 HH rating in 1992. By 1992, a rating point was now equivalent to 921,000 households, which would mean that on average 6.4 million homes were tuned in to the episode.

 

Households don't equal total viewers as the number of people watching in each household varies. Although, higher household is a good indicator that more people are watching obviously. This is also a simplified explanation as Nielsen ratings are very antiquated in how they measure ratings and it's not like there is a measuring tool attached to all of our devices to truly measure how many people really watch anything.

 

But to answer your question an 8.1 HH rating in 1988 for Days would almost certainly equal more viewers than a 9 it scored in say 1978. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Here's the place to share some memorable criticism. You don't have to agree with it, of course (that's often where the fun starts). Like I mentioned to @DRW50, Sally Field was a favorite punching bag in the late '80s and early '90s.   Punchline (the 1988 movie where she and Tom Hanks are stand ups): "It's impossible to tell the difference between Miss Field's routines that are supposed to be awful, and the awful ones that are supposed to be funny." -- Vincent Canby, New York Times. "It's not merely that Field is miscast; she's miscast in a role that leaves no other resource available to her except her lovability. And (David) Seltzer's script forces her to peddle it shamelessly." -- Hal Hinson, Washington Post. "As a woman who can't tell a joke, Sally Field is certainly convincing. ... Field has become an unendurable performer ... She seems to be begging the audience not to punch her. Which, of course, is the worst kind of bullying from an actor. ... She's certainly nothing like the great housewife-comedian Roseanne Barr, who is a tough, uninhibited performer. Sally Field's pandering kind of 'heart' couldn't be further from the spirit of comedy." -- David Denby, New York   Steel Magnolias: The leading ladies: Dolly Parton: "She is one of the sunniest and most natural of actresses," Roger Ebert wrote. Imagining that she probably saw Truvy as an against-type role, Hinson concluded it's still well within her wheelhouse. "She's just wearing fewer rhinestones." Sally Field: "Field, as always, is a lead ball in the middle of the movie," according to Denby . M'Lynn giving her kidney to Shelby brought out David's bitchy side. "I can think of a lot more Sally Field organs that could be sacrificed." Shirley MacLaine: "(She) attacks her part with the ferociousness of a pit bull," Hinson wrote. "The performance is so manic that you think she must be taking off-camera slugs of Jolt." (I agree. If there was anyone playing to the cheap seats in this movie, it's Shirley.) Olympia Dukakis: "Excruciating, sitting on her southern accent as if each obvious sarcasm was dazzlingly witty," Denby wrote. Daryl Hannah: "Miss Hannah's performance is difficult to judge," according to Canby, which seems to suggest he took a genuine "if you can't say something nice ..." approach. Julia Roberts: "(She acts) with the kind of mega-intensity the camera cannot always absorb," Canby wrote. That comment is so fascinating in light of the nearly 40 years Julia has spent as a Movie Star. She is big. It's the audience who had to play catch up. And on that drag-ish note ... The movie itself: "You feel as if you have been airlifted onto some horrible planet of female impersonators," Hinson wrote. Canby: "Is one supposed to laugh at these women, or with them? It's difficult to tell." Every review I read acknowledged the less than naturalistic dialogue in ways both complimentary (Ebert loved the way the women talked) and cutting (Harling wrote too much exposition, repeating himself like a teenager telling a story, Denby wrote). Harling wrote with sincerity and passion, Canby acknowledged, but it's still a work of "bitchiness and greeting card truisms." The ending was less likely to inspire feeling good as it was feeling relieved, according to Denby. "(It's) as if a group of overbearing, self-absorbed, but impeccable mediocre people at last exit from the house."
    • I tend to have two minds about Tawny (Kathy Najimy) fainting during Soapdish's big reveal. You're the costume designer, if anything, you should have known the whole time. I guess it's an application of what TV Tropes calls the "Rule of Funny." Every time I watch Delirious, I always want the genuine romance in John and Mariel's reunion at the deli counter to last longer. Film critics had their knives out for Sally in this period. I'll start a separate thread on the movies page.
    • I don't think so, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was Dumas this whole time.
    • Tamara Tunie was serving up grand dame diva fierceness.
    • Nick told Victoria that he and Sharon had married in England.  Victoria was shocked.  Then she realized he was kidding.  He confirmed it was a joke and they're platonic. I don't even know what to say about that.
    • It's funny you say that because part of the entertainment of the trials on the show are all the day players who come on as witnesses and jurors.  I'm certain it was like the Law and Order of its time. It employed so many New York actors, that if you look close enough, there's usually someone vaguely recognizable in the courtroom.
    • I will defend Dante.  People already suspect he may be a bit unstable from time to time (from his time as a prisoner).  And, he's taking care of other people's kids from time to time.  So, he has reason to be cautious with those in his care.
    • Josh continues to try and milk Abbott/Newman rivalry. First it was Billy/Victoria, then Kyle/Summer, then Noah/Allie (that worked out well) and now Kyle/Claire. Do we have any inkling when Billy Flynn will arrive and who he will play? I'm sure Cole's illness will mostly play offscreen. What's in store for Nick and Sharon? Is it time to put them back together? I can't see any other romantic options. Nick has no children on the canvas to play off, as Christian is never seen. Sharon has only Mariah onscreen.
    • I would appreciate (if they're not coming), for future scripts to refer to them by their iconic hairdos.  For example, if Hope needs to call Chelsea because Bo has Sepsis, I'd like Shawn-D to say, "My Mom called Chelsea (the one with the sassy short black hair) for an update." Also, new rule, if Melanie does return, she needs to dye her hair back to red.  I googled who she was five times during Victor's funeral.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Broderick, thank you for all of the info [I edited for space]. I am so grateful for everyone filling in the blanks for me. I suspected the Nora/Eliot scene was very important and it was setting something up but I didn't know what. Can't wait to see it play out. The two actors had such a great back and forth. I should have made the Paige/Patty Hearst connection. I thought Paige was in love with Brian from the first episode I watched but it seemed as if they were brother and sister. Steve kept being affectionate with her so I assumed he was the love interest. Then she was affectionate with someone else and well..she's a very busy woman. I can't wait to see Frances Fisher show up. (I'm trying to be vague because I don't know what would be a spoiler in this storyline) Now it makes sense why Draper would be upset. I didn't get the whole background of why he didn't go to NY. I'm a sucker for good acting, so I might still side with April and Margo, if the writers don't give Draper more to do besides yelling.  He had more chemistry with Logan, but I know that's not happening.  Something else I noticed: the show really takes care with even the smallest parts. The acting is superb. Too often, I noticed on older soaps they don't take care with the recurring or day players (Ryan's Hope was so bad with this that I couldn't make it through some episodes). It's only been six episodes, but so far, the casting department was spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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