TV Network Upfronts

[yendi]

The latest issue of SMRT-TV is up, and with it, our coverage of the TV Upfronts. Along with D. Roberts Keenan, I covered the CW upfronts, where you can watch me piss off fans of Everwood, One Tree Hill, Charmed, 7th Heaven, and Reba. We also talk about some of the good stuff there (and there's plenty, although if the network had the balls to make the affiliates show more than twelve hours a week, there could be a lot more).

From there, you can read the other Upfronts coverage, as well.

I've been holding off on my thoughts on the new TV season (and the end of the current one), and will probably post something big about the Fall schedule next week, when I've processed it all (and seen what last-minute changes kick in, like moving Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip to a different slot).

Comments

[sdaisyk.livejournal.com]

I'm confused...I thought that 7th Heaven was over, that they had their series finale this year?

[yendi]

They did. Then the CW realized that their pilots were all utter crap, so they paid the producers lots of money and renewed the show.

[mistercrabby.livejournal.com]

I certainly understand that 7th Heaven isn't exactly the pinnacle of quality television, but it was The WB's #1 show for almost its entire run -- why the shock that it came back? I was more shocked that they cancelled it in the first place.

[yendi]

Thing is, it had also gotten so expensive (because of the star and producer salaries), that it just wasn't cost-effective any more. At least, that was the case until the CW realized that it was desperate.

[brak55.livejournal.com]

I think the CW is almost using it as a loss leader. They know it's expensive and they aren't going to make money on it, but it will still probably be the top-rated show on the network and they can rationalize the loss away by promoting other things during the show and trying to get something off the ground after it (even though that didn't seem to work well with Everwood or Related).

[badlittlemonkey.livejournal.com]

and seen what last-minute changes kick in, like moving Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip to a different slot

Oh please please please please, NBC, have the sense to do exactly that. Putting what's probabaly going to be your best new show up against CSI and Grey's Anatomy,/i> would be just asinine. Put ER out of its misery and put Studio 60 on at 10 on Thursdays -- your core potential audience would have no problem watching at that time.

[kradical.livejournal.com]

I can understand putting Studio 60 against CSI, feeling that a) CSI is getting long in the tooth and b) CSI is a plot-driven show, where anything Sorkin does is character driven, so they might be able to work together. But ABC moving Grey's Anatomy there also makes that slot a train wreck for all three of them. I hope NBC blinks and puts it on Mondays at 9 or Thursdays at 10.

[badlittlemonkey.livejournal.com]

Agreed completely. CSI scares me just because of the number of viewers, though I think CSI and S60 appeal to different demographics. But yeah, when I heard ABC was putting Grey's Anatomy in there, too... yeesh. That's the pretty much the same viewership (except Grey's skews a little more female than I have a feeling S60 will).

Don't the nets realize there's only so many viewers to go around? Wouldn't NBC want to put a show like Studio 60 in a slot where it had the best chance to survive and thrive rather than one where it will have to battle for every viewer it gets? The same goes for ABC and Grey's. Neither Grey's nor S60M is going to get as many viewers as it could in a less combative time slot, which means the nets can't charge as much for advertising during either show, and ad sales are what the game's all about, right?

*sigh* This will all change once I'm running one of the networks, that I can promise you. And I wouldn't have cancelled Firefly. Or Wonderfalls.

[kradical.livejournal.com]

And I wouldn't have cancelled Firefly.

Yeah, you would've, if you wanted to keep your job. That show was cancelled because they were hemhorraging money. It was an obscenely expensive show and they just did not have the viewership (the numbers tailed off sharply after the first two episodes).

OTOH, if you were in charge, you probably would've aired the actual pilot instead of "The Train Wreck Job," and therefore might have actually kept more of your audience, thus not necessitating the cancellation. (Tellingly, those first two episodes were among the worst, which is why nobody bothered to stick around for the later, better ones.)

[badlittlemonkey.livejournal.com]

Yeah, you would've, if you wanted to keep your job. That show was cancelled because they were hemhorraging money. It was an obscenely expensive show and they just did not have the viewership (the numbers tailed off sharply after the first two episodes).

Ah, yes, but in the mythical world in which I'm able to run, say, FOX, trivial details such as profit wouldn't matter! It would be all about the quality of the work, the art, dammit -- commerce be damned! Still, point well taken. :)

Your second point, though, is obviously the big one -- they crippled the show's chances of gaining much of an audience before it even got started. And it's that kind of pre-launch crowbar-to-the-kness I'm afraid NBC is giving S60 (to tie everything back together).

[kradical.livejournal.com]

FOX doesn't touch 10pm because all their affiliates have local news programs on then -- it's the one holdover from the three-network days. I suspect that would apply to CW affiliates, as well, since they, like the FOX affiliates, have much more independent programming than the Big Three affiliates.

[yendi]

*nod* That's exactly the case, but as local news broadcasts become less and less relevant (and, with it, less profitable), I suspect that the Lesser Two will start to assert their desire to compete with the Big Three (leaving MyNetworkTV alone for now), and will push for more hours of programming.