BREAKING: ABC Chief Paul Lee Forced Out, Channing Dungey Named Entertaiment President

[HarryWild]

Originally Posted by EmoJoe

Network TV is dying. Everyone's just trying to cash in as much as they can until it inevitably crashes. It's still very profitable, but the industry is changing rapidly and every year the old network system feels a little less relevant. For now network heads will keep trying to find the next Empire or throwing together cheap live events that garner huge numbers but ultimately, everyone knows that streaming is on the horizon and things are going to change drastically pretty soon.

Ultimately, ratings are seeming more and more meaningless. Some of the most popular shows of today are Netflix originals, which don't even release ratings because they're completely irrelevant to Netflix's business model. So trying to define what's making an impact through the outdated Nielsen system seems wildly off-the-mark at this point. Parks & Rec may have been low-rated on NBC but it's made a cultural impact through its popularity on streaming services. Orange is the New Black is one of the most talked about and important shows of the decade, and yet no one has any idea how many people are watching it. So it's almost ridiculous that network TV still has to use this antiquated system for their profit when less and less people are still watching TV live. That's why, eventually, all of this is going to come totally crashing down, and the process seems to be speeding up every single year.

Anyway, as for Paul Lee himself, he has actually done a lot of pretty good work for ABC...he built up their comedy brand, and they arguably have the strongest comedy slate of any network right now. And last season was actually pretty great for ABC, he picked up some buzzy new hits (Black-ish, How to Get Away with Murder, Fresh Off the Boat) and put together the TGIT line-up which has been fairly dominant. Unfortunately for him, ABC had a rough development season and completely collapsed this year - combine that with his apparent meddling with The Muppets (which will go down in history as one of TV's biggest failures) and his questionable "bridge series" idea which involved renewing a lot of low-rated shows and then watching them sink the entire line-up, and it looks pretty bad. So, on the sinking ship that is network TV, he gets the blame and the boot, and ABC is going to try to move in a direction that will allow it to copy both CBS's prodcedurals and FOX's splashy smash Empire.

But that won't work either! CBS themselves have had a somewhat rough year where very little of what they're launching has worked and their once-sturdy procedural/multi-cam empire is slowly crumbling. (Remember when 2 Broke Girls was supposed to be the next giant sitcom? Now it's a bubble show that can't even outrate the already cancelled Mike & Molly). And expecting anything like the insane outlier that is Empire is setting some ridiculous expectations. So, yeah! It all adds up to the same idea: no one knows what the hell they're doing on network TV anymore.

With streaming you can customized you programming and not have to watch live programming aim basically at the 18-34 age group! I now watch past cable network shows on Hulu and Amazon Prime! It been great to bend watch - watching 8-10 episodes at one sitting! It like an adrenaline Rush!

[TMC]

Originally Posted by Cyrax

Wonder if the bridge shows/long breaks concept is going to end now.

Plus is she going to clean house by cancelling Castle, The Muppets, Agent Carter, Nashville & Galavant?

Many people are saying that because the previous president was British, he tried to schedule ABC like British networks do, heavily serialized with shorter orders and long breaks in the winter for even more limited run shows. This brought them critical acclaim on some series but led to a very limited bench from which to draw from when others failed and stuff that leaned heavily female. About his only successes are the Wednesday night comedy block and Thursday nights' Shondaland drama block.

[Cyrax]

Well FOX kind of used the same concept this season and it works for a few of their shows just like ABC but not all.

I still don't see Once Upon A Time not taking a break next Winter but I think everything else will run as pre-2013...

[MrCleveland]

Originally Posted by Mr. Television

I pretty much stopped watching all network TV. I have a few shows on my DVR but haven't watched them in months. I don't know if I will or not.

I have as well...I can't even get most stations on my converter box!

Am I using the wrong antennas?

[mets82]

Originally Posted by ILuvCarolBurnett

I can't imagine being a network programmer in today's world. It would be easier to be a nuclear scientist than to try and gauge what is going to be a hit with such a diverse audience as we have in this country now, and an audience whose attention span is three minutes tops.

I think its pretty easy. Look at what and how they schedule programs. Off the clock marathons of shows. Remember when holidays were the only time you'd see marathons??


What baffles me are shows that are paraded as hits when the ratings are in the toilet. I've heard so many people rave about "Parks and Recreation". I saw an article praising it as one of the greatest sitcoms in recent history. But by what standards? The show was consistently at the bottom of the ratings for its entire 7-year run. If no one watches, is it a hit? I guess it is like if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?

My guess is there is tremendous pressure to make profit at every turn. So, when a network has a hit show, it is used to help salvage other shows the networks and/or critics seem to favor, but the audience doesn't seem to much care for. So, you take that hit show and move it all over the schedule to save other shows or an entire evening lineup that is tanking. Sometimes it helps, and other times, it hurts the ratings of that hit show.

I still think that networks should take time to build up an audience. I mean you've seen shows cancelled after 2 or 3 episodes. How about giving them 13 or even a full season. Shows like Beverly Hills 90210, Melrose Place and Seinfeld werent hits when they first came on but they kept them on and the audience grew.

I don't agree with the notion of trying to revive shows that were hits 10, 20 or 30 years ago. This has,for the most part, proved to be disastrous. NBC tried to revive "The Munsters" a few years ago (that was a God-awful mistake) and even CBS toyed with the notion of reviving "The Beverly Hillbillies" as a reality show. Can't we think of something new?

I respectfully disagree. I feel like if fans want it, then why not? Lots of people are excited about the revival of Full House and the Gilmore Girls plus Girl Meets World has been a big hit.

The biggest problem with TV today is the lack of creativity and novelty, and the shows that are indeed that, seem to disappear after a few episodes. As Carl Reiner said in an interview not long ago, a show like "The Dick Van Dyke Show" probably wouldn't see the light of day today. Every year, we are hit with the recycled ideas for cop shows, medical dramas, CSI-type fare and sitcoms that are about as ill-conceived as they can get.

Being a network programmer to me is a lot like buying lotto numbers. You have no clue if any of those numbers are the winner. You have to buy a certain number of tickets and hope to goodness one is a winner. It is a total crap shoot, and along the way, some really good shows get lost in the mix, if they even make it to a pilot.

Whenever I am in the mood to watch TV, I sit and scroll through dozens if not hundreds of cable channels to find one thing worth watching. It seems it becomes harder and harder. By the time I scroll through a sea of repeat programming, shows that seemed to be geared towards people under 30 (I am forty-eight) or some lame reality show, I am not in the mood to watch anymore. Perhaps that is why TV has such dismal ratings. If the average TV watcher is like myself, we are just tired of the same thing always on. No wonder Barnes & Noble is crowded every time I go in.....

As far as no Dick Van Dyke shows, I dont think they've been pitched. And even if they are, the networks should stay with it to see if they build an audience.

[WatcherofOldTV]

The FIRST thing she needs to do is help to fix the afternoon schedule which is absolutely a mess.

The comedy shows are actually on the up and up. What it needs is a cleanup of the dramas and to bring back the type of shows that were popular in the 80s and 90s like Matlock and Diagnosis Murder, which had an older audience. You can't skew everything to one young audience.

Too many dark dramas and reality shows featuring teeny boppers who can't act and aren't trained...

They need some kind of show(s) featuring an actor who was popular in the 70s and 80s that everybody loves. Similar to the shows that featured Dick Van Dyke and Andy Griffith...

But, they're on the right track. It's NBC that needs work!!