Originally posted by mswood: And ideally what is wrong with repeats airing?
Repeats of Supernatural are already airing. Do you really want to see them burning out the show (or confusing the viewers) by airing those repeats several nights per week? Crowned is filling in between seasons of other reality shows. The scripted series (except for the already dead Life is Wild) are not being displaced at all by Crowned.
quote:
And yes every show is in competition with any "filler programming". After all every slot is a try out in the market to see what the public likes (for what ever reasons) and what it doesn't. Every single one of them has the potential of doing well enough to take over one of the "regular timeslot".
CW will be much better off once it sheds the rest of those people that lash out at all the other on-network programming in an attempt to prop up their favorite show. Long term, CW's survival hinges in finding fans of the network or fans of TV shows in general. They cannot survive off of fans that will boycott the entire network if 'show X' is ever cancelled.
quote:
Just like everyone else, I have my likes and dislikes and I want things I like to do better and things I dislike to go away.
It is ok to want shows you don't like to go away in the hopes of something better coming along. That is a different approach than degrading shows in the hopes that your own favorite will somehow look better.
Hey MARC: That new ad at the top of the page about balding men is really annoying. Any chance you could try to restrict the ads to things that don't interfere with viewing / scrolling?
Originally posted by galveston: Crowned must have an episodic budget of $37, wenart. That's all I can think of.
That is too funny Galveston, but I think it could be true!
Peace!
What does it say about the Supernatural fans that they feel the need to trumpet that their show can beat Crowned? Is this really just a smoke and mirror tactic to keep people from noticing how Supernatural does compared with One Tree Hill?
Actually what's far more interesting is why you single out fans of SN. When every post up to your response was either a general point about how both reruns on Thursday beat Crowned's original performance. Or general comments about how poorly Crowned as done overall.
I mean only one post. One post mentioned Supernatural. OMG run in terror. ANd one posts mentions Smallville run in terror. Its all a disguised attack on a show not even mentioned.
Why instead don't you state why is that people who hate Smallville feel that they need to trumpet a show they don't like to keep people from noticing that it does better then One Tree Hill.
Both myself and Galveston share a special love for One Tree Hill, but when we attack One Tree Hill, we attack One Tree Hill.
Hell I even (on the opening two episodes of OTH) gave a rather long post about both positives and negatives about it from both possible losing and gaining viewers. To be, oh I don't know as fair an impartial as one can be,
After all I can tell you that Smallville isn't a show that Galveston likes.
Originally posted by Ike: How long can CSI continue to repeat this well?
Well, ER was able to repeat very well until last year, so... 12 years sounds about right for CSI.
As long as the originals are pulling big numbers, so will the repeats. Once interest falls for the originals, CSI, or any show for that matter, will see the repeats fall off dramatically too.
As others have pointed out, CSI falls further in reruns when there haven't been any new episodes mixed in for several weeks. Last summer CSI reruns were slumping to 2.3-2.7 in the demo and about 9-9.5 million viewers. My question was: How long can CSI maintain its power with the strike depriving it of new episodes?
I completely agree. You never hear DH fans hoping that GA or Lost does poorly. Or 30 Rock fans hoping that the Office fails. Although, they are not all teens, a lot of CW-show fans act like a bunch of teenage idiots.
You're so right about developing fans of the network. I am a huge ABC fan and will usually watch most anything they put on at least once. Do I like all of their shows? No. But I will give them a glance because I am a fan of the network.
quote:
Originally posted by Obveeus:
quote:
Originally posted by mswood: And ideally what is wrong with repeats airing?
Repeats of Supernatural are already airing. Do you really want to see them burning out the show (or confusing the viewers) by airing those repeats several nights per week? Crowned is filling in between seasons of other reality shows. The scripted series (except for the already dead Life is Wild) are not being displaced at all by Crowned.
quote:
And yes every show is in competition with any "filler programming". After all every slot is a try out in the market to see what the public likes (for what ever reasons) and what it doesn't. Every single one of them has the potential of doing well enough to take over one of the "regular timeslot".
CW will be much better off once it sheds the rest of those people that lash out at all the other on-network programming in an attempt to prop up their favorite show. Long term, CW's survival hinges in finding fans of the network or fans of TV shows in general. They cannot survive off of fans that will boycott the entire network if 'show X' is ever cancelled.
quote:
Just like everyone else, I have my likes and dislikes and I want things I like to do better and things I dislike to go away.
It is ok to want shows you don't like to go away in the hopes of something better coming along. That is a different approach than degrading shows in the hopes that your own favorite will somehow look better.
pisherafferty-free since 2008
Posts: 416 | Location: Los Angeles, CA | Registered: 01 December 2006
Originally posted by Obveeus: It is ok to want shows you don't like to go away in the hopes of something better coming along. That is a different approach than degrading shows in the hopes that your own favorite will somehow look better.
But no one was doing that. You were the one who made the comment about SPN fans bashing on Crowned, which no one had done. The discussion was that, if repeats of other shows could beat Crowned, renewing it (or doing things that make it seem like they might actually renew it) makes no sense. Which you don't have to be a fan of any particular show to conclude. I mean, I wasn't a big fan of any of the shows BW competed against, but that didn't stop me from telling all who would listen that BW's ratings sucked.
And comparing two shows doesn't mean you are trying to tear one down to prop up your favorite. For example, I think Pussycat Dolls is going to whip Crowned's butt in the ratings. And I don't like PD, so I'm not trying to prop it up by saying I think it will do better. I just do.
Originally posted by RussTC3: I think ABC should move Grey's to 10PM.
No show works out of Grey's, NO show.
And use what to anchor the night? The problem with ABC's Thursday 10pm has been shows that are either incompatible with the fickle Greys audience and/or crappy shows.
I've always been a fan of using new shows to start off the evening.
With the writers strike wreaking havoc on next season's slate of programming, I have no idea what ABC has in store for next season.
But, my thought on the matter would be to premiere a new show at 8:00 p.m. on Thursday night that leads into Ugly Betty and then into Grey's Anatomy. Ugly Betty would serve as good counter programming to CSI on CBS and the comedies on NBC, while ABC would benefit also in the 10:00 p.m. hour with reduced competition for the A18-49 demo.
Posts: 533 | Location: Ohio | Registered: 22 September 2006
Originally posted by Obveeus: That new ad at the top of the page about balding men is really annoying. Any chance you could try to restrict the ads to things that don't interfere with viewing / scrolling?
You might want to dump Internet Exploder and try Mozilla Firefox with the Adblock and/or Flashblock and/or Adblock Plus add-ons. You can adjust those add-ons accordingly, and it's all free.
I saw this site using Internet Exploder for the first time in months and I was startled and very confused about where the site's actual content had gone, until I figured out that I needed to scroll waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down.
Posts: 94 | Location: Newark/NYC | Registered: 16 November 2006
Originally posted by mswood: And ideally what is wrong with repeats airing?
Repeats of Supernatural are already airing. Do you really want to see them burning out the show (or confusing the viewers) by airing those repeats several nights per week? Crowned is filling in between seasons of other reality shows. The scripted series (except for the already dead Life is Wild) are not being displaced at all by Crowned.
quote:
And yes every show is in competition with any "filler programming". After all every slot is a try out in the market to see what the public likes (for what ever reasons) and what it doesn't. Every single one of them has the potential of doing well enough to take over one of the "regular timeslot".
CW will be much better off once it sheds the rest of those people that lash out at all the other on-network programming in an attempt to prop up their favorite show. Long term, CW's survival hinges in finding fans of the network or fans of TV shows in general. They cannot survive off of fans that will boycott the entire network if 'show X' is ever cancelled.
quote:
Just like everyone else, I have my likes and dislikes and I want things I like to do better and things I dislike to go away.
It is ok to want shows you don't like to go away in the hopes of something better coming along. That is a different approach than degrading shows in the hopes that your own favorite will somehow look better.
Ok, now where today is anyone making a post (on this subject) degrading a show specifically to make their own favorite look better.
One Tree Hill (Again a show I don't like) is in my opinion far, far, far, far better for a network then crap (again my opinion) like Crowned. And if One Tree Hill's repeats best Crowned I will be all crowing about it. And thats a show I don't like.
I don't like Smallville and haven't for several seasons, but it has 6 years of reruns that the CW could utilize over filler programming like "Crowned"
One that I think would be as financially viable, and certainly better for the network to show a show that has across the board appeal (even if not to me) then something that has been panned by critics, by numerous posters does very poorly.
At least with Pussy Cat Dolls (again something that I hated) it was successful (for the CW). Sure it made the network appear to the public as even more of a joke (which boy howdy it is), but it at least delivered viewers both in original runs and reruns.
I mean while I do generally like scripted shows (a bit, but there is so much I dislike in scripted shows) a bit more then reality. I certainly wouldn't be pushing for Hidden Palms to be giving multiple nights a week. And strickly by the numbers I never watched a minute of that show.
I watched Runaway and like it, but I wouldn't have pushed for the studio to keep it around do to its extremely poor ratings.
Myself, I would have loved if Reaper was a success (a show I like, its my 3rd favorite on the netlet and I do hope that it can gain some audience), or Gossip Girls (a show I have no opinion over as I have only watched half of one episode, or Aliens in America (which is my 2nd favorite show on CW, but has tanked in the ratings). I would love to see Supernatural do better. Sure in the very short run, I want SN to do the better then any show (but do I any hopes of that, no). But I certainly want other shows to do well because if for absolutely no other reason, if they don't, then the netlet goes under and I lose SN that way. So even if I didn't like those two other shows, I would like to see the netlet do better to ensure its survival for several shows. And I don't see Crowned doing any help for the network, in first run or repeats.
Here is the thing though. I realize that all or most of the new shows on the CW need to succeed for the network to stay on the air. I also know that there are some established shows that also need to go as long as possible to continue bringing in the revenue to the network and productions companies which produce them.
Having said that, I have watched at least one episode of the new shows on the CW this season and I did not really care for them. I personally thought that the Gossip Girl pilot episode was trash. I thought Reaper was okay, but not my cup of tea. It is all an acquired taste for everyone. Some on here like reality shows, others don't. Some like sci-fi/horror shows, while others cannot stand them and that is ok.
As others have mentioned, what is so wrong with fans of a show wanting it to succeed? I think Supernatural will last as long as the CW does, which I personally think will be another two seasons or so. However, the CW also needs its new shows to improve for the network to stay on the air.
If some people mention that repeat episodes of a show beat an original run of another show, that is not trying to prop up one show over another. It is strictly looking from the standpoint of the ratings for a particular week. What is wrong with that? When the ratings come in, that is when the comparing and contrasting of shows on a network happen.
Although I am a Supernatural fan and I enjoy the show, I personally hope Reaper does show some improvement when it airs after Smallville. As it stands, the CW does not have any pilots to greenlight when the strike ends. The network will need every show, scripted it has at the moment, to continue on next season. Any improvement is good, especially on the CW.
Originally posted by mswood: I don't like Smallville and haven't for several seasons, but it has 6 years of reruns that the CW could utilize over filler programming like "Crowned".
Why do people claim that a network retains some right to air a show whenever and however many times they want, no matter how many years old that show is? Re-airing episodes of Smallville from many seasons ago might cost as much or more than just going out and buying the syndication rights to a show that has never been on CW before.
Originally posted by Ike: I saw this site using Internet Exploder for the first time in months and I was startled and very confused about where the site's actual content had gone, until I figured out that I needed to scroll waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'waaaaaaaaaaay down'. The ad at the top takes up a couple of inches at the right side of the screen while the mediaweek news headlines (which are of interest) take up space in the middle, and a highly airbrushed photo of Marc sits at left. The current ad just seems to have a problem that occasionally slows the screen from scrolling.
I completely agree. You never hear DH fans hoping that GA or Lost does poorly. Or 30 Rock fans hoping that the Office fails. Although, they are not all teens, a lot of CW-show fans act like a bunch of teenage idiots.
I agree to some extent. Fans of the CW shows, especially Supernatural, are incredibly neurotic. The news that Reaper would be taking its timeslot when SPN runs out of episodes caused such an unbelievable furore in the fandom. I'm a pretty hardcore SPN fan, and even I find the majority of fans unbelievably tiresome and have veered off several sites because of their... Err... "extreme" feelings towards fictional characters.
But, at the same time, I think certain behaviour is justified by the CW's actions and ratings. When it comes to the 9pm shows (More last year than this year.), it's all out war for renewal all the time with the CW making bizarre decisions regarding reality renewals out of desperation to fill up the schedule with lower production costs, when really, the only reality show that constantly deems a renewal is America's Next Top Model. OTH/SPN fans are rabid when it comes to this issue, and are always throwing the other to the lions. But honestly, I don't think either can do anything until we see what kind of numbers OTH levels out to.
Personally, I agree with the poster who said that SPN will be around as the CW is. I don't see them cancelling it any time soon, as Thursday is practically the only night that works for the network and there's evidence to prove that it's not completely dependent on its lead in. It has a stable core audience it seems. OTH is considerably older, has a far bigger cast, and it was the one that was held back to midseason. Out of the two shows, OTH is in more danger than SPN, and even then, in the CW's current climate, it isn't much of an issue.
