13 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

In the early 1960s, an abortion plot on The Defenders, which supported the rights of women to choose, caused an uproar at CBS. The show lost sponsors. Affiliates in many major markets refused to air the episode. Then, in 1972, there was the Bea Arthur sitcom Maude.

some interesting soap connections in that episode:

the physician who performed the abortions was played by judson laire, who was on both love is a many splendored thing and as the world turns;

kathleen widdoes (another world and ‘world turns) played the young woman who had the abortion;

augusta dabney (too many soaps to list) was also in the cast. 

also remember that episode being featured in a mad men episode. 

1 hour ago, wonderwoman1951 said:

some interesting soap connections in that episode:

the physician who performed the abortions was played by judson laire, who was on both love is a many splendored thing and as the world turns;

kathleen widdoes (another world and ‘world turns) played the young woman who had the abortion;

augusta dabney (too many soaps to list) was also in the cast. 

also remember that episode being featured in a mad men episode. 

The Defenders was filmed in NY so it featured may soap actors of that era. Same with The Nurses/Doctors and the Nurses which also filmed in NY.

I've come to believe that individuals claiming "soap opera firsts" really need to distinguish between radio soap operas and television soap operas.  Or at least indicate which they are referring to.  Because several supposed "firsts" on television soaps actually occurred years earlier on radio soaps.  This is often totally ignored.  And since radio soaps and television soaps are actually the same genre, I believe it should be indicated (radio or television, or both).  Otherwise the "first" might be historically inaccurate.  

2 hours ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

I've come to believe that individuals claiming "soap opera firsts" really need to distinguish between radio soap operas and television soap operas.  Or at least indicate which they are referring to.  Because several supposed "firsts" on television soaps actually occurred years earlier on radio soaps.  This is often totally ignored.  And since radio soaps and television soaps are actually the same genre, I believe it should be indicated (radio or television, or both).  Otherwise the "first" might be historically inaccurate.  

Can you post some examples of radio 'firsts'? Would be interested.

2 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

Can you post some examples of radio 'firsts'? Would be interested.

I'll give an example of what I mean:  In an earlier post in this thread, someone stated that Another World had the first soap opera spin-off (Somerset, 1970).  Our fellow poster, Countess Donnatella, corrected that statement by mentioning that Guiding Light had a spin-off decades earlier on radio.   So the truth is -- Guiding Light had the first soap opera spin-off.  And Another World had the first television soap opera spin-off.   

To simply state that Another World had the first soap opera spin-off is historically inaccurate.  

So when we research and publish soap opera firsts, we need to remember the radio days too.  Or at least make clear we are only talking about television soaps.  There are incredible inaccuracies in most lists of soap opera firsts, and many have been published in books as well as online. At least some of these inaccuracies could be cleared-up by merely using the term "television soap opera" rather than simply "soap opera."   

27 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

I'll give an example of what I mean:  In an earlier post in this thread, someone stated that Another World had the first soap opera spin-off (Somerset, 1970).  Our fellow poster, Countess Donnatella, corrected that statement by mentioning that Guiding Light had a spin-off decades earlier on radio.   So the truth is -- Guiding Light had the first soap opera spin-off.  And Another World had the first television soap opera spin-off.   

To simply state that Another World had the first soap opera spin-off is historically inaccurate.  

So when we research and publish soap opera firsts, we need to remember the radio days too.  Or at least make clear we are only talking about television soaps.  There are incredible inaccuracies in most lists of soap opera firsts, and many have been published in books as well as online. At least some of these inaccuracies could be cleared-up by merely using the term "television soap opera" rather than simply "soap opera."   

I find also in writing about these subjects, I employ adjectives, qualifiers like "US daytime" or "primetime" or "English-speaking" ... and that is because I deal with fans of US daytime, US primetime, British & Australian soaps. Words help. And, you are making an important point! 

Also, in a blog of mine I write: We did not start from scratch & create the TV soap. No, first came the radio soap. That began in the ’30s and lasted well through the ’50s with overlap while radio & TV both were airing soaps. GL even aired the same basic script in the morning for radio & down the block to another building, for the TV version in the afternoon. When people first came up with the idea for TV soaps there was fear that they wouldn’t work. They were new & the status quo was very successful. As it turned out the new type of soap was even more successful than the original, which is saying quite a lot. Irna Phillips was the mother of the radio soap & so she also became the mother of the TV soap. The TV soap definitely owes a debt of gratitude to the radio soap & the creators of the new medium definitely stood on the shoulders of the original medium.

I realize this is going further than what you are saying. 

Edited June 11, 20241 yr by Contessa Donatella
more

Santa Barbara, Bridget & Jerome Dobson, New World & NBC, the issue, the lockout, the lawsuits & the impact on the show. 

Wesley Hyatt Ency of Daytime: 

Quote

The biggest controversy, however, arose in 1987 when NBC took creative control away from the show's producers, Jerome and Bridget Dobson, who spent three years trying to get it back.

Wikipedia entry for the show

Quote

 In October 1987, the Dobsons were locked out of NBC studios after repeated attempts to fire the head writer, Charles Pratt, Jr. They sued, and were eventually allowed to return to the program in 1991, ...

Wikipedia The Dobsons 

Quote

In 1988, a long running dispute between the Dobsons and NBC offices came to a head after the Dobsons tried several times to fire head writer, Anne Howard Bailey. Unbeknownst to the Dobsons, Bailey's contract contained a provision that only NBC could terminate her employment; when the Dobsons challenged that, NBC and New World Television, the production company, locked them out of their studio. The Dobsons responded by filing a $53 million lawsuit against NBC and New World Television.

Fandom wiki Santa Barbara

Quote

In 1988, the Dobsons were locked out of NBC studios after repeated attempts to fire the head writer. They sued and were eventually allowed to return to the program,

SOD 

Quote

but was dogged by a years-long, behind-the-scenes legal battle that dragged out between the Dobsons and SB’s production company, New World Television

Michael Fairman

Quote

Ironically, Dobson famously accepted the award in 1988, shortly after then New World Television (now New World Pictures) locked her and her husband out of the show’s studio. This was after a dispute with the production company when the Dobson attempted to fire then head writer, Anne Howard Bailey.

LA Times

Quote

“As executive producer and series co-owner Bridget Dobson, whose contract gave her creative control, including the right to hire and fire writers–tried to dismiss head writer Bailey because of creative differences, she discovered that Bailey’s contract with series co-owner New World Television permitted her dismissal only upon NBC’s request or series cancellation. Citing breach of contract, Dobson’s attorneys declared her own contract with New World rescinded and demanded that the series be returned to her ownership.”

So, we know that Chuck Pratt is wrong & Anne Howard Bailey is correct. Some sources say the lock out began Oct. 1, 1987. Most say 1988. I distinctly remember that New World settled first and NBC let it drag on some but I couldn't find actual dates for either of the two settlements. We further know that the Dobsons won & they were paid an unknown of money. We also have this quote from Bridget from an interview, "It was impossible for Anne Howard Bailey to get inside my head, and I could not get in her head. She has a darker view of life than I do; I think she thinks of me as Pollyanna, and I think of her as Darth Vader." - Bridget Dobson, about SB

Edited June 17, 20241 yr by Contessa Donatella
typo

THE ROAD OF LIFE from 12-13-1954 to 7-1-1955. But this soap had been on radio & very popular from as far back as 1937. Then in 1954 P&G suggested to Irna Phillips that she develop this project for television & P&G would sponsor it. 

What I am wondering is if this by any chance happens to be the first example of a TV soap that was sponsor-owned? Do we know of one before 12-13-1954?

From Eddie Drueding, in regard to things posted here: 

@Paul Raven

Marie Wallaces character on Dark Shadows had twins in 1968 (during the 1897 flashback)

Twins Shula and Kenton Archer were born in August 1958 on the BBC Radio 4 soap “The Archers.”

Looking at UK soaps twins Peter and Susan were born in 1965 on Coronation Street.

 

In fact, it wasn’t until 1962 that one — A Brighter Day — signed an African-American actor to a contract role. Unfortunately, Rex Ingram didn’t have long to make an impact as minister Victor Graham: Two weeks later, CBS cancelled the soap.

@Mona Kane Croft

Delineating radio soap, television soap (or TV soap) he agrees & adds that delineating US rather than British soap, as well. 

4 hours ago, Contessa Donatella said:

THE ROAD OF LIFE from 12-13-1954 to 7-1-1955. But this soap had been on radio & very popular from as far back as 1937. Then in 1954 P&G suggested to Irna Phillips that she develop this project for television & P&G would sponsor it. 

What I am wondering is if this by any chance happens to be the first example of a TV soap that was sponsor-owned? Do we know of one before 12-13-1954?

Although P&G sponsored THE ROAD OF LIFE on television, and may have even produced it, that does not necessarily mean P&G owned the show.  Here is why I say that:

It is not well known, but in the early days of television soaps, P&G was the majority sponsor of some soaps without actually owning them.  For example, there is evidence in writing (which I do not currently have) that Irna Phillips owned Another World for at least a few years, while P&G both produced it (for Irna) and was the majority sponsor.  Eventually Irna sold AW outright to P&G Productions.   So it is likely that Irna may have initially owned other TV soaps (and perhaps even radio soaps) that she had created, while P&G served as producer and sponsor. And later sold them to P&G Productions.  Verifying this would require a very very dedicated researcher.  And my research days are behind me.   

Agnes Nixon, Ted Corday, and Bill Bell took Irna's early practice even further by creating their own TV soaps, licensing them to a network, and then opening their own production companies to produce the shows.  Then years later -- when their creations had been popular in the ratings -- sold their shows (either partially, or entirely) to the network or another production company. Claire Labine did exactly the same thing with Ryan's Hope.  But of course, Labine had never worked for Ms. Phillips.  

As far as I know, Irna Phillips never owned her own production company.  But research might prove otherwise.  

Edited July 6, 20241 yr by Mona Kane Croft

41 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

Although P&G sponsored THE ROAD OF LIFE on television, and may have even produced it, that does not necessarily mean P&G owned the show.  Here is why I say that:

It is not well known, but in the early days of television soaps, P&G was the majority sponsor of some soaps without actually owning them.  For example, there is evidence in writing (which I do not currently have) that Irna Phillips owned Another World for at least a few years, while P&G both produced it (for Irna) and was the majority sponsor.  Eventually Irna sold AW outright to P&G Productions.   ... 

For a few years AW was owned by Irna Phillips, Bill Bell, Rose Cooperman (sp?) & Irna's brother Arlo Phillips (sp again?). Rose being Irna's long-time secretary. Could possibly be Arno. 

23 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

For a few years AW was owned by Irna Phillips, Bill Bell, Rose Cooperman (sp?) & Irna's brother Arlo Phillips (sp again?). Rose being Irna's long-time secretary. Could possibly be Arno. 

Thank you for verifying this!  Wow, i'm impressed.   

So you see my point -- similar situations may have been true for many of Irna's other creations.   And your question about The Road of Life may be difficult to answer accurately.    

25 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

Thank you for verifying this!  Wow, i'm impressed.   

So you see my point -- similar situations may have been true for many of Irna's other creations.   And your question about The Road of Life may be difficult to answer accurately.    

Yes, your point was dead-on. And, I saw the sense of it immediately. I also just happened to know the 4 people who owned AW for a few years, even though I am not sure of the spelling of names. I like it, when you follow me around & make my posts make sense!!! You & me, we is buddies. And, if anyone doesn't like it, they can lump it. 

42 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

Yes, your point was dead-on. And, I saw the sense of it immediately. I also just happened to know the 4 people who owned AW for a few years, even though I am not sure of the spelling of names. I like it, when you follow me around & make my posts make sense!!! You & me, we is buddies. And, if anyone doesn't like it, they can lump it. 

Well, I hope you don't think I am following you around, like a busy-body.  And you do not need my comments to help you make sense. You make sense on your own.  Sometimes I just have an insight to add.  That's all.   

And if the nasty girls don't like it, well . . . being a good Christian woman, I just can't say it. (wiping a tear with my apron)

Edited July 7, 20241 yr by Mona Kane Croft

11 minutes ago, Mona Kane Croft said:

Well, I hope you don't think I am following you around, like a busy-body.  And you do not need my comments to help you make sense. You make sense on your own.  Sometimes I just have an insight to add.  That's all.   

And if the nasty girls don't like it, well . . . being a good Christian woman, I just can't say it. (wiping a tear with my apron)

If you don't have anything nice to say about those mean ole girls, come over here & sit by me!