15 hours ago, Soapsuds said:

The last big holiday bump for soaps.  Sigh....

OJ is 6 months away

42 minutes ago, kalbir said:

OJ is 6 months away

For some reason I thought it was going on already. That's when the ratings fell apart.

We're always so quick to blame O.J. for the across-the-board decline in ratings for soaps, but I think if TPTB had not overreacted like they did and just stayed the course, the numbers might've climbed back up.

50 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

For some reason I thought it was going on already. That's when the ratings fell apart.

June 17, 1994 was the car chase, and we know the rest.

36 minutes ago, Khan said:

We're always so quick to blame O.J. for the across-the-board decline in ratings for soaps, but I think if TPTB had not overreacted like they did and just stayed the course, the numbers might've climbed back up.

Given the ratings data we have now, I say the real issues began in the late 1980s with Iran-Contra, Nielsen people meters, and 1988 writer's strike and it all culminated in the aftermath of OJ.

IMO the OJ trial happening when it did, as opposed to the timing of Iran-Contra, etc., made for kind of a perfect storm for soaps.  In hindsight, a number of formidable writers/producers with strong points of view were recently gone from the industry or stepping back.  Many of the shows weren't offering up their strongest material to begin with, and nearly all of the showrunners were less experienced than some of their recent predecessors at successfully standing up to the networks to protect their vision (to the extent they had one).  For my money, GH was the only soap that was at the top of its game by June of 1994, and Claire Labine has said managing the networks was something she wasn't the best at.  But she and Bill Bell (who was probably more insulated from network meddling) had decades' more experience as head writers than just about anyone else working.

I also suspect Reilly's DAYS benefited from being, unintentionally at least at first, counter-programming.  On the increasingly rare day when even 15 minutes of a soap aired, the possession story was different from anything in the wall-to-wall OJ coverage.  Of course, by the time the ABC/P&G shows started getting mandates to copy it, the trial was no longer offering up sensationalized drama that was at least related to real-life issues, which had been kind of the bare minimum you could expect from most soaps up until that point.

And the drop in ratings across the board seemed to feed into a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Network execs doubled down on their micromanaging, which had already probably weakened some of the lower-rated shows, because now almost every show's ratings constituted a crisis.  At least, it did in their minds, although the fact that any shows are still on the air 30 years later—all with much lower ratings—casts doubt on the idea that most/all soaps weren't still turning a healthy profit back then.

2 minutes ago, DeliaIrisFan said:

IMO the OJ trial happening when it did, as opposed to the timing of Iran-Contra, etc., made for kind of a perfect storm for soaps.  In hindsight, a number of formidable writers/producers with strong points of view were recently gone from the industry or stepping back.  Many of the shows weren't offering up their strongest material to begin with, and nearly all of the showrunners were less experienced than some of their recent predecessors at successfully standing up to the networks to protect their vision (to the extent they had one).  For my money, GH was the only soap that was at the top of its game by June of 1994, and Claire Labine has said managing the networks was something she wasn't the best at.  But she and Bill Bell (who was probably more insulated from network meddling) had decades' more experience as head writers than just about anyone else working.

Bill Bell was totally free of network meddling. Only he had it, but he had it in spades. And, once he was gone, Y&R didn't even have a grace period. They began micromanaging IMMEDIATELY. 

Who are you thinking of, strong, who was not on the scene now?

And, the shows were very slow to make any kind of a positive reaction. Having soap updates at 5 till the hour didn't occur for many weeks. And, broadcasting after the night talk show, also wasn't thought of for a long danged time. 

56 minutes ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

Bill Bell was totally free of network meddling. Only he had it, but he had it in spades. And, once he was gone, Y&R didn't even have a grace period. They began micromanaging IMMEDIATELY. 

Who are you thinking of, strong, who was not on the scene now?

 

Most notably, Doug Marland had died the year before, so ATWT was both struggling creatively and written by people with little to no experience standing up to networks.  Nancy Curlee had just left GL, and Robert Calhoun a couple of years before that.  Agnes Nixon was allegedly sidelined at AMC during Megan McTavish's tenure (wasn't MM the first person besides Nixon to be credited at the top of AMC's writers?) so probably less inclined to do battle with ABC.  And, controversial or not, didn't Linda Gottlieb also leave OLTL that year (although that might have been an effect as opposed to a cause of the changing power dynamics)?  Of course, others going back to Irna Phillips had been long gone.

ETA: SB had been canceled the year before, so—also controversial—Pam Long and the Dobsons were not working in the industry for the first time in over a decade and several decades, respectively.

I just wonder what would have happened if a few more of these veteran showrunners had been around to present a united front with peers like Labine, and Bell, even if he was less personally affected.  Even Reilly, with his newfound clout, by all accounts did not like being micromanaged.  But he was probably just doing his own thing and to some extent oblivious to what generic writers at lower-rated shows were dealing with.

Edited February 25, 20241 yr by DeliaIrisFan

4 minutes ago, DeliaIrisFan said:

Most notably, Doug Marland had died the year before, so ATWT was both struggling creatively and written by people with little to no experience standing up to networks.  Nancy Curlee had just left GL, and Robert Calhoun a couple of years before that.  Agnes Nixon was allegedly sidelined at AMC during Megan McTavish's tenure (wasn't MM the first person besides Nixon to be credited at the top of AMC's writers?) so probably less likely to do battle with ABC.  And, controversial or not, didn't Linda Gottlieb also leave OLTL that year (although that might have been an effect as opposed to a cause of the changing power dynamics)?  Of course, others going back to Irna Phillips had been long gone.

Wow, when you look at it like that, dayum, what a list of "No Longer Present"!! 

Given the NBC mindset about Reilly, who they thought was a miracle-worker, they very likely did not micromanage him, content to just watch whatever outrageousness he might come up with next. Now, eventually he didn't get his way. He wanted those 10 characters to be dead-dead. And, not that I like giving him credit, but Corday made him do Melaswen Island & bring them all back to life. For once Corday asserted himself & was correct. 

4 minutes ago, DeliaIrisFan said:

I just wonder what would have happened if a few more of these veteran showrunners had been around to present a united front with peers like Labine, and Bell, even if he was less personally affected.  Even Reilly, with his newfound clout, by all accounts did not like being micromanaged.  But he was probably just doing his own thing and to some extent oblivious to what generic writers at lower-rated shows were dealing with.

Good what if. 

 

1 hour ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

Given the NBC mindset about Reilly, who they thought was a miracle-worker, they very likely did not micromanage him, content to just watch whatever outrageousness he might come up with next. Now, eventually he didn't get his way. He wanted those 10 characters to be dead-dead. And, not that I like giving him credit, but Corday made him do Melaswen Island & bring them all back to life. For once Corday asserted himself & was correct. 

 

Exactly - whatever creative freedom Reilly enjoyed at that time, he might have seen the writing on the wall and spoken up if he had seen multiple writers he knew and respected being steamrolled by the suits. 

So many showrunners in place at that time seemingly were in over their heads.  It's hard not to think some others just didn't care.  You might say the networks stepping in was justifiable, at least until they rehired writers and producers who had proven histories and apparently treated them the same way.

Edited February 25, 20241 yr by DeliaIrisFan

32 minutes ago, DeliaIrisFan said:

Exactly - whatever creative freedom Reilly enjoyed at that time, he might have seen the writing on the wall and spoken up if he had seen multiple writers he knew and respected being steamrolled by the suits.  So many showrunners in place at that time seemingly were in over their heads.  Maybe some just didn't care.

I really don't know if Reilly would've felt that kind of collegiality, or either that he would've had concern for the state of the genre. 

So many people on so many shows did not have a sense of ... Well, they didn't seem politically aware of things going on with other soaps or the networks, etc. 

AW was the exception to that rule. 

My impression is that soap actors & PTB mostly kept their heads down. 

2 hours ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

I really don't know if Reilly would've felt that kind of collegiality, or either that he would've had concern for the state of the genre. 

So many people on so many shows did not have a sense of ... Well, they didn't seem politically aware of things going on with other soaps or the networks, etc. 

AW was the exception to that rule. 

My impression is that soap actors & PTB mostly kept their heads down. 

Reilly is probably a stretch, true - although to hear Nancy Curlee tell it, he did not play along with CBS/P&G's efforts to divide and conquer their writing partnership at GL.  And he did manage to get some of the best GL script writers to Passions (I'm not sure what they did there, based on the dialogue in every scene I ever saw).  It wouldn't have had to be a big public thing, but there were writers and producers with proven track records of delivering successful material and not taking any sh*t from the networks who were recently MIA at what turned out to be a critical juncture.

19 minutes ago, DeliaIrisFan said:

Reilly is probably a stretch, true - although to hear Nancy Curlee tell it, he did not play along with CBS/P&G's efforts to divide and conquer their writing partnership at GL.  And he did manage to get some of the best GL script writers to Passions (I'm not sure what they did there, based on the dialogue in every scene I ever saw).  It wouldn't have had to be a big public thing, but there were writers and producers with proven track records of delivering successful material and not taking any sh*t from the networks who were recently MIA at what turned out to be a critical juncture.

When Nancy talked in the Locher Room about Jimmy throwing his lot in with her & Stephen, I had to laugh. Great thinking about a HW triumvirate pitting themselves & their words against the suits. I am for it!

Well, at @kalbir's request, I've come back to do the season + summers for the 1990-91, 91-92, and 92-93 seasons.

1990-91
1	. Y&R	8.0 (0.0)
2.	GH	6.3 (-0.7)
3.	AMC	6.0 (-0.3)
4.	ATWT	5.9 (+0.1)
5.	B&B	5.6 (-0.1)
6.	OLTL	5.3 (-0.7)
6.	DAYS	5.3 (-0.1)
8.	GL	5.2 (-0.1)
9.	AW	3.9 (0.0)
10.	SB	3.1 (-0.4)
11.	LOV	2.9 (-0.4)
12.	GEN	2.3 (-0.2)

 

1991-92
1	. Y&R	8.3 (+0.3)
2.	AMC	6.8 (+0.8)
3.	ATWT	5.7 (-0.2)
4.	GH	5.6 (-0.7)
5.	B&B	5.5 (-0.1)
5.	GL	5.5 (+0.3)
7.	OLTL	5.3 (0.0)
8.	DAYS	5.2 (-0.1)
9.	AW	3.9 (0.0)
10.	SB	3.0 (-0.1)
11.	LOV	2.7 (-0.2)

 

1992-93
1	. Y&R	8.3 (0.0)
2.	AMC	7.2 (+0.4)
3.	B&B	5.9 (+0.4)
4.	GH	5.8 (+0.2)
5.	ATWT	5.7 (0.0)
6.	OLTL	5.6 (+0.3)
7.	GL	5.3 (-0.2)
8.	DAYS	4.9 (-0.3)
9.	AW	3.2 (-0.7)
10.	LOV	2.8 (+0.1)
11.	SB	2.6 (-0.4)

 

A rare era of ratings gains after so many years of decline. Unfortunately, as we're all aware, short-lived. Y&R stays consistent while Agnes Nixon and McTavish revitalize AMC (before McTavish's hubris derails everything), gaining 1.2 in two years. ATWT hits #3 in 1991-92 despite losing 0.2 (such is the state of things at that point, with ABC and NBC soaps struggling). DAYS bottoms out in 1992-93, dipping below 5.0 for probably the first time since probably their first year.

Shocking to see OLTL's continued collapse into 1991. The fact they'd lost viewers every year since 1987-88, dropping from 7.4 in 87-88 to 5.3 by 1990-91 before FINALLY stabilizing once Rauch was finally given the boot, Gottlieb really did manage to re-energize things, at least in the short term.

Monty really messed things up at GH, helping them lose 1.4 during her time there, before Riche was able to quickly start turning things around with Bill Levinson and Maralyn Thoma (pre-Labine, of course). OUCH at AW's drop in 1992-93 at the end of Swajeski's run. I wonder how much of that drop was due to her stories sucking, how much was the other NBC soaps' declines, and how much was OLTL's recovery.

@beebs Thank you for the new season end ratings  

I took your 1991/92 season end ratings and updated the net differential from 1987/88 to 1991/92 and the new rankings are 

Y&R +0.4

B&B +0.2

All My Children -0.5

Guiding Light -0.5

As the World Turns -0.8

Another World -1.1

Loving -1.3

Santa Barbara -1.6

Days -1.8

General Hospital -2.1

One Life to Live -2.1

 

For 1992/93 the rankings are

B&B +0.6

Y&R +0.4

All My Children -0.1

Guiding Light -0.7

As the World Turns -0.8

Loving -1.2

One Life to Live -1.8

Another World -1.8

General Hospital -1.9

Santa Barbara -2.0

Days -2.1

 

Edited February 28, 20241 yr by kalbir

CHART UPDATES: WEEKS OF 9/7/92 & 12/28/92 NOW HAVE FULL INFO LISTED: