Has the CW taken steps this season to improve their fortunes? This article from MediaLife believes so:

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/Televi...rk_gets_it_right.asp

What do you think?

Good article and I agree with most of what it said.

Did the author of this article actually look at the ratings before writting? I found the whole article to be highly biased and I wonder what his true inentions were.

quote:

Originally posted by WelcomeToK-Ville:
Did the author of this article actually look at the ratings before writting? .

Your question makes absolutely no sense. It is very clear from the article that the writer is following the ratings.

Well if he did read them, then he should be hired as part of the CW spin department. Talk about cherry picking the highlights.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by WelcomeToK-Ville:
Did the author of this article actually look at the ratings before writting? .

Your question makes absolutely no sense. It is very clear from the article that the writer is following the ratings.

quote:

Originally posted by WelcomeToK-Ville:
Well if he did read them, then he should be hired as part of the CW spin department. Talk about cherry picking the highlights.

Name one thing in the article that was inaccurate or misleading. Was he 'cherry-picking the highlights' when he said that Gossip Girls 'got whacked this week by a slew of season premieres'? What is it that you are complaining about in the article?

What's wrong with the article? Read the header. That alone is inaccurate.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by WelcomeToK-Ville:
Well if he did read them, then he should be hired as part of the CW spin department. Talk about cherry picking the highlights.

Name one thing in the article that was inaccurate or misleading. Was he 'cherry-picking the highlights' when he said that Gossip Girls 'got whacked this week by a slew of season premieres'? What is it that you are complaining about in the article?

quote:

Originally posted by WelcomeToK-Ville:
What's wrong with the article? Read the header. That alone is inaccurate.

The header is a comment on CW's efforts this season compared to what they put together last season and is talking about 'brand identity'. The header is accurate.

Good new shows, but terrible promotion and execution in launching a new season. Of course, no surprise there- this is Dawn Ostroff's network. Anyone with a brain knows they should've launched the whole thing earlier than they did (especially nights like Sunday and Monday). Thursday honestly could've waited until this coming week to launch.

I agree with most of what the article said about the CW, however I disagree with his claim on the Thursday dramas. Considering that Smallville premiere to 5 million viewers and Supernatural was pulling about 3.3 - 3.5 million viewers against CSI and Grey's Anatomy, I doubt that the CW would change their Thursday lineup anytime soon considering how horrible Gossip Girl did during their showing and the forever problematic Monday and Sunday. And Supernatural is definitely not pass its prime with only three seasons and still plenty of stories to continue. The ratings for Thursday is actually one of their strongest nights curently only behind Friday with the recent horrible ratings of Gossip Girl.

Although I don't understand how the author can say that Aliens in America and Reaper being male skewing with the male leads while Smallville and Supernatural is not male skewing with their male leads. Do male viewers not watch shows with good looking male leads? Or is the contents of Supernatural and Smallville not male skewing? I really don't understand some of things that the author is saying about Thursday night.

I believe that firing Dawn Ostroff and the marketing department and hiring competent replacements for both would be one of the biggest steps that the network can take to improve their ratings and schedule.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Suzaku,

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/News_shorts_31/index.asp

There is an interesting article at the bottom of the page, where Media Life basically apologized to the Supernatural and Smallville fans for calling the show mediocre because there was a torrent of letters from Supernatural and Smallville fans that said you are horrible and should do research before calling a show mediocre.

Another example of the crazy rabid fan base of Supernatural. I can't wait to see what happens when this show eventually gets cancelled.

quote:

Originally posted by Suzaku:
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/News_shorts_31/index.asp

There is an interesting article at the bottom of the page, where Media Life basically apologized to the Supernatural and Smallville fans for calling the show mediocre because there was a torrent of letters from Supernatural and Smallville fans that said you are horrible and should do research before calling a show mediocre.

quote:

Originally posted by mushu_jj:
Another example of the crazy rabid fan base of Supernatural. I can't wait to see what happens when this show eventually gets cancelled.

quote:

Originally posted by Suzaku:
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/News_shorts_31/index.asp

There is an interesting article at the bottom of the page, where Media Life basically apologized to the Supernatural and Smallville fans for calling the show mediocre because there was a torrent of letters from Supernatural and Smallville fans that said you are horrible and should do research before calling a show mediocre.

The way the season has started for The CW, the network may be canceled first.

quote:

Originally posted by mushu_jj:
Another example of the crazy rabid fan base of Supernatural. I can't wait to see what happens when this show eventually gets cancelled.

It can't have been worse than when Veronica Mars was canceled, however I wasn't sure that Veronica Mars was canceled. Although Media Life's apology was offensive as well. And quite frankly they are a professional magazine, do they really need to sink to the immaturity of the teenagers that can't use the English when they apologize?

I find it extremely humorous that this thread was filled early on with claims that the writer was biased in favor of CW shows and now the thread is filled with claims that the writer is biased against a CW show.

Fact is Supernatural is at the very, very bottom of returning shows that made the Fall schedule. Nothing worse got a full renewal and immediate placement on the Fall schedule. Only One Tree Hill performed worse and got any renewal at all for the scripted shows. The article wasn't being 'unfair' to Supernatural by calling it's ratings mediocre. If anything, the article was being overly kind in its praise for the show. If anyone should complain, it should be the Smallville fans. The ratings are still mediocre in a network TV sense, but in CW terms, Smallville is a highlight on their schedule.