Jump to content

In Loving Memory: Ruth Buzzi (Letitia Bradford on DAYS, 1983)


JAS0N47

Recommended Posts

  • Members

It seemed to be your intent. coming into a thread I started and making multiple posts saying my data was wrong.

In the next paragraph you say "Of course, I was suspicious from the very first instance where what I saw & heard did not agree with what it should have.  I'm very glad to know why." That certainly didn't stop you from immediately saying the data was wrong, until I provided additional receipts.

Why did you not check the daily episode guide (for instance, this one for the 1980's) I posted for the world to see for exactly this reason...to help confirm airdates:

http://daytimeroyaltyonline.com/days-daily-summaries-1980-1989-t15361.html?

That is what you should be checking BEFORE you make any posts in the future like this, trying to suggest something from my data is incorrect. You could have also messaged me and asked me why your dates weren't adding up with what the correct data is. I would have fast forwarded through that video you posted, spotted Roman and Hope and immediately have told you that was the 11/1/83 episode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 18
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I'm sorry but clearly what I've said is not satisfactory to you. I have now read what you have to say, twice. As it happens, my interest at this point is looking at other mislabeled files to find this other Ruth Buzzi content. I do not see any point to each of us repeating ourselves, so I will leave it here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That was the original point of me sending you her 6 airdates, so now with those, and the link to the daily episode guide I've provided, that should help you more easily find the additional Ruth Buzzi scenes.

I will always repeat myself when it comes to defending my data that I've taken decades to research and compile. But, as you pointed out in a recent post, I am kind, so at least I will do it with you in a kind way as opposed to the usual social media way most people do with just getting rude/nasty. That's not my style, as you correctly pointed out earlier this week, and never will be.  So, all is well! 

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • It surprises/disappoints me too that GL's ratings during '89-'93 don't reflect the quality of the show. But when I call it great soap, I'm not defining that by ratings either.  I'm probably in the minority, but I think Reilly takes something intangible with him when he goes. There's a sense of humor that just disappears in '93. 
    • Ok, I know nothing about Another World except their catchy intro song from long ago, but this makes me want to catch!  That crazy mother keeping her son's girlfriend or wife hostage, wow! 
    • And maybe Hotel could have been placed at 9pm Tues instead of Paper Dolls. Not that I thing it was a surefire thing but at least viewers were familiar with the show and it might have done better than PD. ABC's line up was pretty threadbare at that point. And with a big guest star to launch the season - Elizabeth Taylor- the numbers would have been there initially.
    • Any fan of RuPaul would dispute calling any of these examples “drag”. A costume?, A disguise?, A lame attempt at humor? -- yes -- Drag? -- nope
    • No asterisk. I meant that the circumstances during the first year were in her favor.
    • Maybe I am misunderstanding you? Are you suggesting that her success at GL should have an asterisk next to it because she was smart enough to exploit a weakness in the marketplace to gain ratings?  Note: Try not to take this personally—I’m not accusing anyone of being consciously misogynistic. I’m simply proposing that the origins of certain ideas about Ms. Phelps—such as claims that she was unprepared or a poor manager of her writing staff—may be rooted in misogyny. Perhaps, with the benefit of hindsight, it's worth reconsidering those opinions. At the very least, imagine being one of the few women in the room while a male network executive tries to decide what women want to watch during the day. That context has certainly led me to reassess many of my own long-held views.
    • Through 78 and 79 under Marland and Pat Falken smith GH was still heavily hospital based with a mix of storylines. The Doctors would have been fine had they followed that template. Once GH went with Ice Princess all bets were off.Who knows how much TD would have copied that direction? And OLTL, DOOL went in that direction quite heavily while other shows dabbled in far out stories. The thing is that TD was well set up for an expansion.
    • Thank you

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Aaron Spelling still had clout with ABC in Fall 1984, as I think they knew he was going to pull out all the stops for Dynasty to get to #1, which he did. That's probably why ABC kept Hotel as Dynasty lead out. Fall 1985 with the sale to Capital Cities and Brandon Stoddard arrival, Aaron Spelling would lose his clout with ABC.
    • Correction, July 1991 to May 1995. JFP got the ratings up during her first year, but it also helped that ABC big three were tanking at various times during that year and Days was in their post-supercouple/pre-Reilly mess era. It will always disappoint me that the ratings during the Calhoun/Long/Curlee era did not reflect the quality of the show.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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