http://www.tvweek.com/news/2007/10/sophomore_slump_at_cw.php

October 21, 2007

Sophomore Slump at CW
Promising New Series Weak in Ratings
By James Hibberd

After the May upfronts, The CW coasted through the summer on positive buzz earned by a trio of promising new fall shows. After the rocky start of its 2006 launch, the network seemed poised to finally break out of the shadow of twin forebears UPN and The WB with a new slate that had critics excited and its 18-to-34 target demographic firmly in its sites.

Four weeks later, many in the industry are wondering: What happened?

It’s not so much that viewers have watched and rejected The CW’s new programs as that the network threw a party and few bothered to show up. Premieres ranged from average ("Gossip Girl") to stillborn ("Life Is Wild").

For the first few weeks of the season, the network’s target demo was down 23 percent from last year, back when The CW was still trying to explain to viewers where to find the channel.

"They just have not gotten any traction," said Bill Carroll, VP/director of programming at Katz Television Group. "It’s surprising at this stage of the game."

Part of the network’s rating worries have since been offset by early live-plus-seven data showing digital video recorder usage. Shows like "Gossip Girl," "Reaper," "Smallville" and "America’s Next Top Model" are gaining about 20 percent among adults 18 to 34 when DVR data is added to the tally. Plus, "Gossip" has ranked among the top shows sold on iTunes -- another reminder that The CW's youthful viewers (the network has the lowest median age) are more likely to watch their shows in non-traditional ways.

Also on the bright side: New drama "Reaper" and sitcom "Aliens in America" have shown some growth in their most recent airings.

"I can’t say we’re totally satisfied with the ratings, but we’re looking to see growth and we are seeing growth," said Dawn Ostroff, The CW’s entertainment president. "This was the big step for us in terms of original programming that’s right for our brand. We feel very patient and are very committed to these shows."

The CW’s plan is to try to build the audience for "Gossip" (which got a full-season pickup), "Reaper" and "Aliens" (which likely will get pickups soon), then supplement the slate with previously announced mid­­season reality fare.

"What I see on the air now between ‘Gossip,’ ‘Reaper’ and ‘Aliens’ are quality, and quality wins out," said John Maatta, The CW’s chief operating officer. "‘7th Heaven’ was dead last in all of television [when the show debuted on The WB in 1996]. If we had given it three months-and-out, it would have been a tragedy."

Still, you can’t plan a network’s future without analyzing the past. Consensus is The CW made at least one tactical misstep: not scheduling original content this summer (aside from the low-rated "Hidden Palms").

"We didn’t have any programming on toward the end of summer and, in hindsight, I would have liked to have done that differently," Ms. Ostroff said. "We had to get the network up and going in a short period of time, [and] we were very focused on the fall. If we can do original programming from a budgetary standpoint and creative standpoint, we would like to have more original programming on next summer."

The lack of summer originals cost the CW the modest ratings mo­men­tum it built during the regular season.

For The CW, launching its first original slate against the heavy marketing noisemakers of the major networks, it needed to ramp up viewership to help promote its shows on air.

Another question is whether The CW put enough marketing dollars be­hind its new shows to break through the clutter.

"The network needs to spend more and spend differently, because they lack the promotional platform of their own network," said John Rash, senior VP and director of media negotiations at Campbell Mithun.

"We spent an awful lot," Mr. Maatta countered. "We spent a lot by most standards. ... You’ve got to give things time."

Few CW executives would argue against a budget increase from parents CBS Corp. and Warner Bros. to become more competitive year-round, but nobody was willing to address the matter on the record.

Another possible issue, Mr. Rash said, is that The CW schedule tends to have programming that appeals to very different audience segments. Viewers who watch young-female-skewing "America’s Next Top Model" are different from the young men watching "Friday Night Smackdown," who are different from the sci-fi fans of "Supernatural" and "Smallville."

"The CW’s desired demographic is the hardest to break through to, and the network is still inconsistent," Mr. Rash said. "The universality is youth, but with distinctly different draws that make it hard to promote pro­grams creating audience flow from one night to the other."

Ms. Ostroff disagrees the current schedule is too diverse, especially compared to predecessor UPN. "We are much more targeted than any of the other networks. They are much broader networks. [Our shows target] more or less the same demographic, just speaking to different sectors."

One aspect that could have an impact is The CW is running behind broadcast competitors in being available in high definition. It’s not yet available in HD on some systems, such as Time Warner Cable in Los Angeles, or on national satellite service Dish Network.

"Around the country we have awful good HD penetration," said Mr. Maatta. "It’s important. We’ve got to be nationwide and we’re working on it."

From a station standpoint, Mr. Maatta said, the network still has a good-news story to tell. "This is the last best distribution system in broadcast TV that’s ever going to be created," he said. "We have really strong affiliates. There has not been a negative word from that constituency."

Gary Weitman, a representative of the Tribune station group which carries The CW, agreed.

"We are very pleased with The CW," Mr. Weitman said. "The demos in our markets are good and we're optimistic."

That the industry largely concurs that The CW's fundamentals are all in order is another positive sign. The network has the stations, the shows and the demo target. Now all The CW needs is their audience to actually tune in -- preferably in a traditional way that allows the network to readily monetize the viewership.

"They have done what they were supposed to do," Mr. Carroll said. "They made the transition, the shows they have really focused on the audience they're trying to reach. Their strength is exactly where they think it is -- younger women. If there's a segment that's under-served, that's it."

The article seems to hint at continued support for Gossip Girl, Reaper, and Aliens in America. Meanwhile, Life is Wild is not mentioned with such support. I wonder if that has to do with the writer or with CW's intentions towards the show?

If they don't find a way to improve the OVERALL QUALITY of some of their shows, all the hype they can possibly generate isn't gonna bring the viewers in. their target demo has a lot to choose from, & they're not gonna waste their time with junk.

Amazing how they mentioned 7th Heaven was dead last in viewers in season one but ended up being the most successful show to ever come out of the WB, UPN, and the CW. Yet, the idiots are not realizing Life is Wild is a gold mine sitting on Sunday with no support. Move the freakin show to Monday already! Also, they failed to mention that only an idiot would schedule their best new show directly against a spinoff of a show with massive 18-34 following (Private Practice). It all comes down to the summer and the promotion though. Nobody was watching the CW so nobody knew. Had they tried a few reality shows (perhaps that spinoff of B&tG called Fountain of Youth that never aired), then maybe they would've gained some traction. I also think they should've had an earlier launch to stuff. UPN and the WB both were known for early launches (up to 3 weeks before the traditional season). Even MNTV figured that out.

The new shows have a lot of good qualities to them. They did an excellent job with a development slate that nobody was excited about last spring and turned it into the most buzzworthy of any network. Unfortunately, it was only the TV junkies that were tuning in. I know you have issues with reality, but B&tG and Top Model are two of the better ones on TV and they do very well with the target audience. The problem is that the target audience just doesn't watch that much TV (at least not live). A show like Life is Wild and Aliens in America could be pulling much broader audiences as could the entire Monday slate but they're not putting a lot of money behind those shows because they don't seem to want any other audiences. It's really ridiculous. Both UPN and the WB always realized that you needed wide skewing shows on the lineup too (Star Trek, 7th Heaven, Reba, Everwood, the entire African American comedy blocks). For some reason, Dawn and company have forgotten those shows.

quote:

Originally posted by robycop3:
If they don't find a way to improve the OVERALL QUALITY of some of their shows, all the hype they can possibly generate isn't gonna bring the viewers in. their target demo has a lot to choose from, & they're not gonna waste their time with junk.

Mushu, ya might be onto something about wider-skewing. they seemta be TOO-focused upon the one demo, and that demo, I believe, is NEVER gonna be locked into just one net or set of shows above all others. Something else ya hit on...today's members of that young demo doesn't watch as much TV as my generation did when WE made up that young demo.

Reality? Yes, I don't like most reality shows, and the WB/UPN was known. along with Fox, for making some of the worst garbage ever to pollute the airwaves. And what the CW has waiting in the wings doesn't look a bit better than their past reality jive. I believe you know that ANTM is successful ONLY because of TYRA BANKS. If SHE gows, the show will soon be history. BATG's novelty has worn off, & it's slipping downhill.

I believe they made a mistake in dropping Reba , and an even-bigger one in dropping Everwood. And personally, I didn't watch reba real often, and Everwood not at all. I was judging by their ratings.

I believe they gave up on "Pepper Dennis" too quickly. A little tweaking, & this coulda been a great show.

I hope they stick with both Gossip Girl & Reaper...and tell their writers to get their act a little more together. Each one has great potential, if they WORK on them.

To me, their future show "Farmer Needs A Wife" appears to be lame as a one-legged horse.

Believe it or not, I'm in their prime demographic and I'd rather watch stuff on the other networks. This stuff just doesn't appeal to me. As for the reality shows, I'd say their new shows all have a chance because the young folks like the garbage that MTV and VH1 put on the airwaves. Farmer Wants a Wife sounds like a quirky possibility that could become a hit because of the culture clashes. As a farm kid growing up I think this will be entertaining for me. Of course, it could be cheaply produced and stink too. Crowned sounds dumb, but the Top Model crowd will be tuning in at least initially. Puddy Catts are also coming back.

If CW just focuses on women age 18 to 34, it will never get a wide viewership. Lifetime, Oxygen, MTV, E, even VH1 and a host of other channels are going after that same demographic. There's nothing the CW offers that is that different than those stations.

As for not sticking with Life Is Wild, it's odd that CW seems willing to dump the only show that could get a wide viewing audience to the network. Unlike most CW shows, this one skews older and more with families. These demographics could spill over to other shows, causing increased ratings and increased demos. Why promote x number of shows fighting over a limited pool of viewers when you can help another one that dips in other pools of viewers.

As for the new shows Crowned is the worst idea CW has had in recent memory. It'll crash hard. Pussycat Dolls was terrible the first time it came out. I don't expect it to be any better in quality. Farmer Wants A Wife could be like Flavor of Love and be a complete train wreck and trashy goodness. They seem to be going for a Simple Life on the farm type idea. If casted well, it could work. I'd give it the most potential out of the three.

You need to realize that 18-34 year olds are not necessarily looking for quality when it comes to reality shows. The girls drool all over stuff like the Hills and Laguna Beach- both which I consider to be unwatchable but they have an audience.

It's bunk like that, that makes me glad I have 155 channels, and other forms of entertainment available. It also makes me gladta live in the USA where people are freeta make or view such trash, and the law of supply and demand is the rule.