http://www.vulture.com/2018/03/roseanne-march-has-been-great-for-network-tv.html

Between 60 Minutes' Stormy Daniels interview and the Roseanne revival, it's been a pretty good month for broadcast TV, says Josef Adalian. As he explains, "this month’s developments hint at a potential path forward for the dinosaurs of the small screen. First, the successes of recent weeks show that networks need to aim for the watercooler with event programming. Not to be confused with buzzy shows — Netflix has no shortage of those — watercooler shows are those programs best consumed the night they air, so they can be dissected immediately on social media, or the next day at work or school. Think singing contests (American Idol, The Voice), weekly elimination competitions (Survivor, The Bachelor), live musicals (this weekend’s Jesus Christ Superstar), specials, live sports, or even big newsmaker interviews like the one 60 Minutes conducted with Daniels."

It clearly shows that after all the public didn't change much, and that there are at least 20millions americans still interested in good old fashioned sitcoms with family values, and not just young bachelors with pop-culture references.

The answer is no. Roseanne said so herself that most of the show's base is working class, so for it to be on ABC for free, as opposed to a streaming service where you'd have it pay, it will be more successful.

You have to know where your market and where they're most likely to watch. What might work well for one, may not work well for another.

One episode after 20 years where people tuned in out of nostalgia... after a few more episodes, like seven or eight, we'll see.

I'll agree, though, I would love to ask each viewer individually what they thought of the episode and if they would tune in for more and why. (Some people would hate the show but watch because for numerous reasons, the least of which being "you can't say anything if you didn't watch it". Some will not watch despite feeling the nice cozy nostalgia but are done.)

Oh, broadcast networks still have people paying. Want broadcast to be free by the genuine definition of the word? Then get rid of commercials where the sponsors spend millions of dollars on ads that gets spread across each unit of product sold to us. The cost to make and air each commercial gets to be rather high - so there's one possible solution to everyone screaming about "higher food costs" or "didn't this package used to say 9oz now it's 8.5oz yet the purchase price didn't go down?" Get rid of commercials. Let's see Roseanne whine about that on TV for a thrill.

It clearly shows that after all the public didn't change much, and that there are at least 20millions americans still interested in good old fashioned sitcoms with family values, and not just young bachelors with pop-culture references.

That's the one aspect I fully liked in what's otherwise looking to be a new version of "All in the Family". Family values. Which is amazing given the reduced marriage rate, delayed marriage, etc, etc, out in real life. Again, a few more episodes are needed to see where Roseanne is going with all this and one pilot episode can't tell it all.