No, I am seeing bias in Marc's analysis because (for example) every week I see him neglect to call shows such as Old Christine and Gary losers, while they get ratings similar to that of several NBC shows which he calls losers every week.
And you just refuse to understand that two shows with exactly the same ratings can be doing very differently, when you take timeslot, lead-in, and other factors into account. Marc has positive things to say about many NBC shows, but the fact is that there just isn't much positive to say.
And since Old Christine is now in its fourth season, it can't just be Marc's bias keeping it on the air, now CAN it? Nor was it his bias that canceled ER.
quote:
I don't really care if he lists shows as a winners or losers.
You really shouldn't. But you really do.
quote:
But lets be fair and put all shows on a level playing field.
The playing field is NEVER level. Marc understands, in a way you never will, just how pointless it is to predict a given show's longterm survival or looming cancellation based purely on a comparison of numbers. There is no precise mathematical formula that can be used. It's a black art, and he's one of its foremost practitioners, which is why he's proven right, over and over again. As he was with ER, which according to its defenders here, should never have been canceled. And now that Marc is vindicated, you lack the honesty to admit it.
quote:
He'll always give the benefit of the doubt to shows on CBS
ALWAYS? Remind me what benefit of the doubt he gave to Viva Laughlin?
quote:
and find ways to shed a positive light on them, while always shedding a negative light on NBC (and most of the time on ABC as well), even when it is not deserved.
Right now, I can't say I have very positive feelings towards any of the networks. My favorite network drama is Lost--ABC. My favorite sitcom is The Office--NBC (and looking forward to Parks&Rec).
And I see no bias whatsoever in Marc's analysis of those shows--nor do I have any problem with his frequent disses of How I Met Your Mother, my favorite CBS series.
I don't always agree with his opinions (or anybody else's), but it's evident that at all times, he's just trying to do the best job he can of analyzing the ratings performance of network shows, taking ALL factors into account--except the wounded feelings of people who apparently feel their own sense of self-esteem is threatened by 'their' shows and 'their' networks failing to do as well as they think they should.
This sore loser attitude is really annoying--and Marc's tolerance for personal abuse, directed at the FORUM ADMINISTRATOR, is beyond anything I've ever seen elsewhere.
Originally posted by Zedman2: Bids for the repurposing and off-net rights for Anatomy closed Friday; BVT is said to have been seeking $2 million per episode under an all-cash, four-year licensing deal—with no cap on the number of seasons.
What does this mean? How can you have a four-year deal with no cap on the number of seasons?
I believe future seasons get rolled into the deal which is why According to Jim continues.
But if you only have a licensing deal that last 4 years, you cannot possibly end up with more than 4 additional seasons to pay for, right?
AMEN, pisher! And thank you. I put up with a lot of this because I think a good argument about TV is healthy. But some of you...yeesh!!! You purposely try to attack me.
Hey pisher...I hope you can join me for the next live chat on Wednesday, April 8 at 2 p.m. ET.
No, I am seeing bias in Marc's analysis because (for example) every week I see him neglect to call shows such as Old Christine and Gary losers, while they get ratings similar to that of several NBC shows which he calls losers every week.
And you just refuse to understand that two shows with exactly the same ratings can be doing very differently, when you take timeslot, lead-in, and other factors into account. Marc has positive things to say about many NBC shows, but the fact is that there just isn't much positive to say.
And since Old Christine is now in its fourth season, it can't just be Marc's bias keeping it on the air, now CAN it? Nor was it his bias that canceled ER.
quote:
I don't really care if he lists shows as a winners or losers.
You really shouldn't. But you really do.
quote:
But lets be fair and put all shows on a level playing field.
The playing field is NEVER level. Marc understands, in a way you never will, just how pointless it is to predict a given show's longterm survival or looming cancellation based purely on a comparison of numbers. There is no precise mathematical formula that can be used. It's a black art, and he's one of its foremost practitioners, which is why he's proven right, over and over again. As he was with ER, which according to its defenders here, should never have been canceled. And now that Marc is vindicated, you lack the honesty to admit it.
quote:
He'll always give the benefit of the doubt to shows on CBS
ALWAYS? Remind me what benefit of the doubt he gave to Viva Laughlin?
quote:
and find ways to shed a positive light on them, while always shedding a negative light on NBC (and most of the time on ABC as well), even when it is not deserved.
Right now, I can't say I have very positive feelings towards any of the networks. My favorite network drama is Lost--ABC. My favorite sitcom is The Office--NBC (and looking forward to Parks&Rec).
And I see no bias whatsoever in Marc's analysis of those shows--nor do I have any problem with his frequent disses of How I Met Your Mother, my favorite CBS series.
I don't always agree with his opinions (or anybody else's), but it's evident that at all times, he's just trying to do the best job he can of analyzing the ratings performance of network shows, taking ALL factors into account--except the wounded feelings of people who apparently feel their own sense of self-esteem is threatened by 'their' shows and 'their' networks failing to do as well as they think they should.
This sore loser attitude is really annoying--and Marc's tolerance for personal abuse, directed at the FORUM ADMINISTRATOR, is beyond anything I've ever seen elsewhere.
Originally posted by Marc Berman: AMEN, pisher! And thank you. I put up with a lot of this because I think a good argument about TV is healthy. But some of you...yeesh!!! You purposely try to attack me.
Hey pisher...I hope you can join me for the next live chat on Wednesday, April 8 at 2 p.m. ET.
No, I am seeing bias in Marc's analysis because (for example) every week I see him neglect to call shows such as Old Christine and Gary losers, while they get ratings similar to that of several NBC shows which he calls losers every week.
And you just refuse to understand that two shows with exactly the same ratings can be doing very differently, when you take timeslot, lead-in, and other factors into account. Marc has positive things to say about many NBC shows, but the fact is that there just isn't much positive to say.
And since Old Christine is now in its fourth season, it can't just be Marc's bias keeping it on the air, now CAN it? Nor was it his bias that canceled ER.
quote:
I don't really care if he lists shows as a winners or losers.
You really shouldn't. But you really do.
quote:
But lets be fair and put all shows on a level playing field.
The playing field is NEVER level. Marc understands, in a way you never will, just how pointless it is to predict a given show's longterm survival or looming cancellation based purely on a comparison of numbers. There is no precise mathematical formula that can be used. It's a black art, and he's one of its foremost practitioners, which is why he's proven right, over and over again. As he was with ER, which according to its defenders here, should never have been canceled. And now that Marc is vindicated, you lack the honesty to admit it.
quote:
He'll always give the benefit of the doubt to shows on CBS
ALWAYS? Remind me what benefit of the doubt he gave to Viva Laughlin?
quote:
and find ways to shed a positive light on them, while always shedding a negative light on NBC (and most of the time on ABC as well), even when it is not deserved.
Right now, I can't say I have very positive feelings towards any of the networks. My favorite network drama is Lost--ABC. My favorite sitcom is The Office--NBC (and looking forward to Parks&Rec).
And I see no bias whatsoever in Marc's analysis of those shows--nor do I have any problem with his frequent disses of How I Met Your Mother, my favorite CBS series.
I don't always agree with his opinions (or anybody else's), but it's evident that at all times, he's just trying to do the best job he can of analyzing the ratings performance of network shows, taking ALL factors into account--except the wounded feelings of people who apparently feel their own sense of self-esteem is threatened by 'their' shows and 'their' networks failing to do as well as they think they should.
This sore loser attitude is really annoying--and Marc's tolerance for personal abuse, directed at the FORUM ADMINISTRATOR, is beyond anything I've ever seen elsewhere.
And you just refuse to understand that two shows with exactly the same ratings can be doing very differently, when you take timeslot, lead-in, and other factors into account.
Yes, I do understand this. I understand that Christine and Gary air in one of the weakest time slots on the whole schedule (when Idol is not there). The recent schedule for Wednesdays at 8PM vs Christine and Gary:
ABC: Scrubs / Better off Ted NBC: Chopping Block FOX: Lie to Me
Tough competition for CBS, huh? Yet, Christine and Gary could not muster much higher than 7 million viewers and a 2.0 18-49 rating.
Meanwhile, NBC's Chuck (which I have never watched by the way) was getting similar total viewer ratings earlier in the season (they have come down since but the 18-49 ratings remain right on par with Christine and Gary) and is a loser every week. The competition for Chuck:
CBS: Big Bang / How I Met Your Mother FOX: House ABC: Dancing With the Stars
Yes, pish, he is really putting these shows on a level field. Chuck airs in one of the toughest time slots on TV, Christine and Gary, the weakest, yet Chuck is a loser, and the the CBS shows are not. Uhhh, OK...
quote:
And since Old Christine is now in its fourth season, it can't just be Marc's bias keeping it on the air, now CAN it?
Nope. What kept Christine on the air has been a cushy time slot on Monday nights. CBS was ready to pull the plug on it after last season, but they did not want to see ABC pick it up.
quote:
You really shouldn't. But you really do.
I don't care about winners and losers. Just interested in fair analysis.
quote:
There is no precise mathematical formula that can be used. It's a black art, and he's one of its foremost practitioners, which is why he's proven right, over and over again. As he was with ER, which according to its defenders here, should never have been canceled. And now that Marc is vindicated, you lack the honesty to admit it.
He is not one of the foremost practitioners. When he repeats week after week that he can't understand why ABC brought back Scrubs this is proof in the pudding. Most of know that Scrubs was brought back because additional episodes equals more syndication dollars for ABC Studios. Why doesn't he know this?
And I never recall reading posts on this forum by people saying that ER should not have been canceled.
quote:
ALWAYS? Remind me what benefit of the doubt he gave to Viva Laughlin?
Even for him, he could not have reached far enough to give any benefit of the doubt for that show.
Originally posted by Marc Berman: AMEN, pisher! And thank you. I put up with a lot of this because I think a good argument about TV is healthy. But some of you...yeesh!!! You purposely try to attack me.
Hey pisher...I hope you can join me
I am sensing a strong bit of irony here as the person that puts forth the largest number of 'purposeful attack posts' on this forum (pisher) is on Marc's winer list.
Originally posted by Marc Berman: …and the ranking of other series-finales:
MASH (CBS) – Feb. 28, 1983: 60.2 rating The Fugitive (ABC) – Aug. 29, 1967: 45.9 Cheers (NBC) – May 20, 1993: 45.5 Seinfeld (NBC) - May 14, 1998: 41.3 Magnum, P.I. (CBS) – May 1, 1988: 32.0 Friends (NBC) – May 6, 2004: 29.2 The Cosby Show (NBC) – April 30, 1992: 28.0 All in the Family (CBS) – April 8, 1979: 26.6 The Mary Tyler Moore Show (CBS): March 19, 1977: 25.5 Dallas (CBS) – May 3, 1991: 22.0 Home Improvement (ABC) – May 25, 1999: 21.6 Everybody Loves Raymond (CBS) - May 16, 2005: 20.2 Happy Days (ABC) – May 8, 1984: 19.0 Newhart (CBS) – May 21, 1990: 18.7 The Beverly Hillbillies (CBS) – March 23, 1971: 18.1 Three Company (ABC) – Sept. 18, 1984: 17.9 Gunsmoke (CBS) – March 31, 1975: 15.3 Hill Street Blues (NBC): May 12, 1987: 17.0 St. Elsewhere (NBC): May 25, 1988: 17.0 Frasier (NBC) - May 13, 2004: 16.3 L.A. Law (NBC) – May 19, 1994: 15.9 Roseanne (ABC) – May 20, 1997: 11.6 Will & Grace (NBC) - May 5, 2006: 11.5
I don't know how many (if any) of the above listed shows aired their finale on the 4th place network at the time of said finale, but just taking a look at the most recent few:
Friends (NBC) – May 6, 2004: 29.2 Everybody Loves Raymond (CBS) - May 16, 2005: 20.2 Frasier (NBC) - May 13, 2004: 16.3 Will & Grace (NBC) - May 5, 2006: 11.5
Does anyone have a primetime schedule that lists what shows aired against these finales?
Southland on NBC.com? Oh yes, another crime show is so needed on television. This will sink like a stone.
A bland, rich rookie is not the type of fantasy lead that entices viewers to crime shows. The successful CBS formula has a reassuring, supercompetent, older group leader. Cable has nutcases, either comedic or sociopaths.
One thing both CBS and cable crime shows have in common is that there are too many of them.
At least broadcast seems to have eased off on lawyer shows, the few new ones mostly being produced on cable.
AI was on before the oc finale, it had a 25 million leadin that night, not that impressive at all
quote:
Originally posted by mushu_jj: The OC was up probably around 100% percent on its season average for its series finale. It did well considering its season average. ER did very well too.
quote:
Originally posted by Riff Rafferty: I agree. Yes, it's agreed. The "ER" finale did terrible. How dare this show only improve on its penultimate episode ratings by 160%. "The O.C." proved that a much higher percentage of departed viewers than that will always come back for the series finale.
Originally posted by Marc Berman: …and the ranking of other series-finales:
MASH (CBS) – Feb. 28, 1983: 60.2 rating The Fugitive (ABC) – Aug. 29, 1967: 45.9 Cheers (NBC) – May 20, 1993: 45.5 Seinfeld (NBC) - May 14, 1998: 41.3 Magnum, P.I. (CBS) – May 1, 1988: 32.0 Friends (NBC) – May 6, 2004: 29.2 The Cosby Show (NBC) – April 30, 1992: 28.0 All in the Family (CBS) – April 8, 1979: 26.6 The Mary Tyler Moore Show (CBS): March 19, 1977: 25.5 Dallas (CBS) – May 3, 1991: 22.0 Home Improvement (ABC) – May 25, 1999: 21.6 Everybody Loves Raymond (CBS) - May 16, 2005: 20.2 Happy Days (ABC) – May 8, 1984: 19.0 Newhart (CBS) – May 21, 1990: 18.7 The Beverly Hillbillies (CBS) – March 23, 1971: 18.1 Three Company (ABC) – Sept. 18, 1984: 17.9 Gunsmoke (CBS) – March 31, 1975: 15.3 Hill Street Blues (NBC): May 12, 1987: 17.0 St. Elsewhere (NBC): May 25, 1988: 17.0 Frasier (NBC) - May 13, 2004: 16.3 L.A. Law (NBC) – May 19, 1994: 15.9 Roseanne (ABC) – May 20, 1997: 11.6 Will & Grace (NBC) - May 5, 2006: 11.5
I don't know how many (if any) of the above listed shows aired their finale on the 4th place network at the time of said finale, but just taking a look at the most recent few:
Friends (NBC) – May 6, 2004: 29.2 Everybody Loves Raymond (CBS) - May 16, 2005: 20.2 Frasier (NBC) - May 13, 2004: 16.3 Will & Grace (NBC) - May 5, 2006: 11.5
Does anyone have a primetime schedule that lists what shows aired against these finales?
I find it funny that Marc has had this list waiting for days, just so he could use it as arsenal to attack NBC when the ratings were not on par with others on the list.
I would bet that no other show on that list basically turned over its cast 3 or 4 times over its run. The show was basically a different show than when it began. The name just stayed the same. To compare the ratings to the others on that list is so inane (I know Marc loves this word).
Yes, I do understand this. I understand that Christine and Gary air in one of the weakest time slots on the whole schedule (when Idol is not there). The recent schedule for Wednesdays at 8PM vs Christine and Gary:
ABC: Scrubs / Better off Ted NBC: Chopping Block FOX: Lie to Me
Tough competition for CBS, huh? Yet, Christine and Gary could not muster much higher than 7 million viewers and a 2.0 18-49 rating.
There's a whole lot of data missing from this, AL. Ratings for the other shows, HUT levels, whether the average includes repeats, etc.
quote:
Meanwhile, NBC's Chuck (which I have never watched by the way)
But you're not talking about SHOW biases--you're talking about NETWORK biases--like yours for NBC.
quote:
was getting similar total viewer ratings earlier in the season (they have come down since but the 18-49 ratings remain right on par with Christine and Gary) and is a loser every week. The competition for Chuck:
CBS: Big Bang / How I Met Your Mother FOX: House ABC: Dancing With the Stars
I'm going to hazard a wild guess that HUT levels are a teensy bit higher in this timeslot.
It's all relative, and you can't deal with that. Chuck is a loser because of what's expected from it, in order to stay on the air--it's in great danger of cancellation, as even its fans acknowledge. Christine and Gary seem pretty safe. Marc has nothing to do with that. So yeah, both those shows are doing better than Chuck.
quote:
Yes, pish, he is really putting these shows on a level field. Chuck airs in one of the toughest time slots on TV, Christine and Gary, the weakest, yet Chuck is a loser, and the the CBS shows are not. Uhhh, OK...
You just demonstrated why your basis for comparing these shows is invalid. They have to satisfy different sets of expectations at their respective networks. And remember--CBS is doing very well now--they don't NEED Christine and Gary--but they're renewing those shows.
NBC is going from failure to failure--and yet Chuck is on the bubble now. Marc's opinion is that of the industry as a whole. It's just reality. Chuck isn't doing what it needs to do. Christine and Gary are. I'm sorry you think that's unfair. And I'm even sorrier that you feel obliged to whine about it so incessantly.
quote:
Nope. What kept Christine on the air has been a cushy time slot on Monday nights. CBS was ready to pull the plug on it after last season, but they did not want to see ABC pick it up.
You mean the way Scrubs got canceled because NBC didn't want to see ABC pick it up?
quote:
I don't care about winners and losers. Just interested in fair analysis.
Sheahright.
quote:
He is not one of the foremost practitioners.
So what are you doing here? Go over to the forum maintained by one of his more-respected professional peers.
quote:
When he repeats week after week that he can't understand why ABC brought back Scrubs this is proof in the pudding. Most of know that Scrubs was brought back because additional episodes equals more syndication dollars for ABC Studios. Why doesn't he know this?
He does. But he doesn't think it's a good enough reason. And the ratings have borne him out yet again. Scrubs should never have come back. From the NETWORK's POV, it was a bad move, at a time when they should be concentrating on building their audience, not padding the syndication package of a show one of their sister companies makes, that mainly airs on Comedy Central now.
You assume ABC must be right to give Scrubs one more season--but CBS is being dumb and petty keeping Old Christine on the air? Seems to me CBS is making the better business decisions at the present time--convenient for Marc that the network you claim he's biased in favor of happens to be the strongest network, huh? And the network you claim he's biased against is the weakest. What a coincidink.
quote:
And I never recall reading posts on this forum by people saying that ER should not have been canceled.
I said there were many posts here from people saying NBC WOULD NOT cancel ER--that Marc was wrong about its ratings being too low to justify continuing its run. That NBC should keep it on indefinitely. Hell, Bluelick said just a day or so ago that NBC was helping to kill scripted television by canceling ER.
quote:
Even for him, he could not have reached far enough to give any benefit of the doubt for that show.
So when you said "Always", you meant "Sometimes"?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: pisher,
