Abraham J. Simpson

How does this clown continue to scam viewers?

Every generation seems to lament what those newfangled whippersnappers like. Bring back Milton Berle and Ed Sullivan. What the heck are music videos? Who wants to watch kids dance for an hour? What hasn’t changed is the audience dictates the content. What people reject goes away. And while sequels/reboots/rehashes of existing IP are by no means anything new in TV, they seem to get a disproportionate share of “there are no original ideas” when in fact there are many. Of course audiences familiar with whatever brand may gravitate toward checking it out; we’re human and like positive memories. If people stick around and enjoy the show on its own merits, great. But there’s plenty of original ideas and creative twists on older ones (Stranger Things and Wednesday from Netflix come to mind as one example of each). And all kinds of content from music to movies to TV has borrowed, some more blatantly than others, from what came before. Much of the original content from basic cable migrated to streaming as the audience did. Makes sense; follow the money. And it also follows that we’d see a big push early on for original content to give each platform an identity and a reason to pay up. That dust will settle and the investments will become more targeted into what proves to be working. The broadcast model is dying. It’s not dead and won’t be for a while, but it’s on the way. It’s going to need to rely on a changing mix of programs to wring some remaining life out of it, and rely on streaming to pick up some of the lost audience. For now, it’s sustainable with adjustments.

The audience chooses what it chooses, and whether any one of us likes or detests it, that’s where we are. There is still plenty of original syndicated fare that’s not Springer or courtroom shows, but when you’re the fifth or sixth place broadcaster in a world where your audience is also watching streaming, recordings, on-demand and the like, lower cost options are what you need to not take a loss. The advertising market has splintered and continues to splinter. There’s no going back. Spending money you don’t have and will never recoup isn’t going to work.

There’s a lot of wistful, rose-colored-glasses nostalgia in this thread. And perhaps a bit of “get off my lawn” as well. Trying to apply the model of broadcasting from decades ago into today’s world isn’t going to work. The audience has changed. Technology has changed. Yet the broadcasters should operate like it’s 1982? How does that work? The ecosystem is much larger, and people do not—and will not—watch content the way they once did. That’s not a bad thing; it’s the nature of the world. If you try to cling to the old ways, you’re hastening your demise.

Y&R beat those shows where it didn't have an advantage in timing. It was a better show back all those decades ago. (And far more people tuned in to Days/AMC than the preceding shows). Several factors interact with each other. But here we are in 2023. It's a vestige of a bygone era with that timing, and until they at least axe B&B, there's not much else to do, realistically, until it's time to put one or both out to pasture. That's the current point--there's nothing to get a leg up on. We've left that era long behind.

I think it was two things converging for NBC. Peacock needing content, heck yes. But they also had viable, if not terribly sexy, programming as an alternative from the news side of the house that would also align with their primary daytime network approach. Kind of two birds, one stone and all that.

That would suggest they find an opportunity to profit from it. Not everything goes over to a streaming service. Some series just die. For every “show X moves to streaming” you can list many more that don’t, even in the streaming era. What I suggested was there is no automatic reason to expect such a scenario to play out. Different platforms, different parent companies. Different strategic priorities. Maybe it does. Maybe it doesn’t.

It’s not inevitable it goes to Paramount Plus. It’s entirely possible to just send it to the graveyard of TV shows. The midday CBS affiliate newscasts in the east would sill have Price as a lead in, for whatever that’s worth. And what station manager wouldn’t prefer the extra revenue for little extra investment in resources?

And even then it was in a sort of dismissive tone. Ah, the joys of outsized egos.

NBC may be experimenting with the Days on Peacock deal, but we have yet to see just how long that is really going to last. Would it work on Paramount Plus? That's dubious to be generous. And the Talk is never being cut to 30 minutes. B&B will go away before that happens. Y&R at 12:30 ET for a long time put it head to head with other soaps, not getting a jump. (Loving, anyone? Port Charles?) It's more a vestige of having an extra half hour of programming, not competing with another soap. Competition is everything--news, syndication, all of it. Y&R is at as much a disadvantage in areas where other hour long programs have started on the hour and it's at :30. If CBS can milk more money out of their remaining shows, more power to them. We all know the future isn't long term, but take the cash now, and when it's time to move on, just move on.

Bob was about one person, Bob. When the powers that be had the “audacity” to launch subsequent syndicated editions of the show (85, 94), he all but pouted and stamped his feet on air. It was kind of comical in how petty it was. But whatever, Drew does a nice job of working in positive references, and heck, maintains the spay-your-pets plug.

I shouldn’t say Drew himself is the only party responsible. It was as much the producer change and the process that followed of evolving the show. Set updates, more interaction and respect for the models and announcer, better prizes and so on. Once Drew became visibly more comfortable with the show, all of that began to click and growth followed. Naturally people are going to show deference and respect to Barker; he did it for 35 years. Drew is not quite to half that, and he has long sprinkled in references out of respect to Bob’s era. He’s made the show his while not forgetting what came before. As for Y&R, the problem with over-reliance on veterans is, bluntly, we all have a shelf life. It may just be the show running on fumes until the end comes. Even the characters who were the “young hotties” back in the day have become the old guard, and they’re still recycling the same plots. You can’t keep telling the same stories with the same actors well into their 60s and 70s and expect them to click with newer viewers. But budgets are what they are, and there just isn’t that big a pool out there to draw from. Props to NBC for trying to make a go of Days on Peacock, but let’s be honest: the end of soaps isn’t that far in the future.

It feels like there's a chicken-or-the-egg type situation there. GL got banished to 10 am after it had one foot, and maybe four toes on the other foot, in the grave. The move to mornings on major affiliates was just the final nail in the coffin, to keep going with the Halloween-esque death theme. It had become an anchor in the late slot, and CBS just seemed to meander with a daytime lineup carried by Price, Y&R and B&B. Finally, someone started swinging the axe and the dead weight was jettisoned. GL and ATWT had demos that were beyond awful for quite some time (worse than daytime as a whole, which is saying something). Price was rejuvenated with the hosting change, and improved the demo nightmare it had. Y&R at this point feels like it's coasting on fumes. My mom kept watching until near the end of her life; I checked out the story lines to try to have something she could relate to for conversation as her mind began to fail--but she could still kind of relate to that. And no wonder--it was the same damn characters and plots from when she was watching in like 1985. How it remains on the air baffles me, but it's not my P&L statement to worry about.

Fantastic production for a school program. Great job by all involved.

Vacation type days and such aside, Brittany is pretty well set Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays. With the launch of the 10 am, Chris seems to be, generally, Tuesdays and Wednesdays—Tuesdays being the new addition for him. Adam is indeed the fill-in when someone is off or what have you. All summer, the rotation of who had the weather at the shore segments also seemed to factor in on occasion.

WPVI is definitely not the same format. It is a more straightforward though lighter newscast. Headlines and all that, and a good amount of feature-ish content—consumer news, trending/social media content, etc. No separate desk, or that kind of thing. The producer is one who helped shape their 4 pm, and she’s brought a similar (not identical) feel to 10 am. Good vibe among the presenters, and they’ve managed to work in the weekend morning meteorologist who typically handles Wednesdays at noon for one weather segment the last couple of Wednesdays.

It is. A guess, thinking it through, they wanted that to launch with the full treatment, for lack of a better word. Put the new stuff in place with the changing of the opens? It’s not the cheapest route, but maybe that’s just how things aligned. Won’t make much of a difference to most viewers, so no big deal either way.

There are first times for everything., and it’s a perfectly reasonable approach.

Not all situations are comparable. Chris Cuomo crossed a huge ethical line. That doesn’t mean every other person related to a public figure in hot water is going to cross a line. Keep her off covering that story, fine. If there is evidence she crosses a line, do what needs to be done. Don’t assume a problem where one is not indicated and stymie her career for something she did not do.

Fall opening sequence for the news: check. New voice doing the opening: check. (No idea who, don't pay that close attention to who's who in that world.)

It’s pretty easy to argue. No one would be recycling those at this point. The comedy stuff they’re plugging the hole with is what it is, but it fits what they’re doing with the hour, broadly. Rehashed PBS interviews? Not a chance.

Would that be best, or did the station have data that says otherwise? 3 pm for Y&R feels like a big stretch that would need some compelling business rationale, which isn’t “but Live feels like a morning show.” It is light fluffy entertainment well suited to mornings, but light fluffy talk can work in afternoons.

Not really seeing that as all that much of an issue. If they were doing well with Live at 10, great. It may be unusual, but seems pretty understandable.

And there was a plethora of amazing entertainment at 12:30 am? They don't need to give the time back at this point. Whatever strike filler there is, it's not really a big deal. The networks have given plenty of time over the years, and they're also in business to make money as a network. It's 2023 and the business models need to reflect that reality. What was that, All in the Family reruns?

If I were in charge of an ABC station and it was getting MNF back even for a season, heck yes, I'd be happy. It's a heck of a lot more sellable as an established brand to my local clients than some of the other programming. Is it as good as SNF in terms of matchups? Of course not. But while I'm still saddled with the Bachelor and Dancing with the Stars et al, a primetime marquee sports franchise back on my air, temporary or otherwise, is a win. Meh, times change, circumstances change and the world doesn't stay frozen in 1984.