Norman Lear and Rita Moreno are grappling with One Day at a Time's cancelation - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

TMC · 05-01-2019, 04:27 PM

...over data

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...lation-1205229

"It wasn't that the show failed to serve underrepresented audiences or address real-life issues with heart," the two TV icons write in a Hollywood Reporter essay. "We're told by critics and fans alike that our show was 'smart, funny, and, most crucially, empathetic toward people who rarely get such attention and consideration.' We've learned from our younger peers that we have 100 percent on Rotten Tomatoes and that we should be proud of that! We're assured that we never once failed to advance Netflix's stated commitment to representing diversity in its content — yet, because of the data, we're on to 'next.' So we've learned that evidently all the details are in the 'data.' We get it; corporations are responsible to their stockholders. And one could argue that it's the data — what we've known through the years as Nielsen ratings — that inevitably drives the decision-making process. But something is missing if that is the only criterion for survival of a show, the only data point, the only litmus test. Perhaps media has gone the way of managed care — the focus no longer patient and doctor, but bottom line."

Netflix content chief says One Day at a Time had a "core, passionate but pretty small audience," but doesn't want to see it on a rival streaming platform

Netflix vice president of originals Cindy Holland defended the cancelation of One Day at a Time, telling The Hollywood Reporter that it wouldn't have made it past one season at any other place. She also said in reaction to CBS All Access' reported interest in One Day at a Time that "we don't think that it's appropriate that it show up on a competitive streaming platform." Was Netflix not owning One Day at a Time a factor in its cancelation? "Ownership doesn't play a factor at all, although the cost of the season vs. the viewership is generally how we look at these things," said Holland. "The reason why the decision was so protracted between seasons two and three and then after season three for One Day at a Time was because it didn't make economic sense for us to renew the show, frankly, at either point. We love the show and we knew it had a passionate audience, and we felt it was important to continue to support it. We supported three seasons of it, but at some point, you have to make the difficult decision to say goodbye and try to look for other stories to tell and invest in that hopefully will garner larger audiences. One Day at a Time had a core, passionate but pretty small audience that didn't materially grow season over season. Frankly, we were looking for reasons to try to continue to say yes, and we just got to the point where it was hard to find them — other than knowing we loved the show and that it had a small core audience."

05-01-2019, 04:27 PM	#1
TMC Member Forum Idol Join Date: Jan 09, 2001 Posts: 125,459	Norman Lear and Rita Moreno are grappling with One Day at a Time's cancelation ...over data https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...lation-1205229 "It wasn't that the show failed to serve underrepresented audiences or address real-life issues with heart," the two TV icons write in a Hollywood Reporter essay. "We're told by critics and fans alike that our show was 'smart, funny, and, most crucially, empathetic toward people who rarely get such attention and consideration.' We've learned from our younger peers that we have 100 percent on Rotten Tomatoes and that we should be proud of that! We're assured that we never once failed to advance Netflix's stated commitment to representing diversity in its content — yet, because of the data, we're on to 'next.' So we've learned that evidently all the details are in the 'data.' We get it; corporations are responsible to their stockholders. And one could argue that it's the data — what we've known through the years as Nielsen ratings — that inevitably drives the decision-making process. But something is missing if that is the only criterion for survival of a show, the only data point, the only litmus test. Perhaps media has gone the way of managed care — the focus no longer patient and doctor, but bottom line." Netflix content chief says One Day at a Time had a "core, passionate but pretty small audience," but doesn't want to see it on a rival streaming platform Netflix vice president of originals Cindy Holland defended the cancelation of One Day at a Time, telling The Hollywood Reporter that it wouldn't have made it past one season at any other place. She also said in reaction to CBS All Access' reported interest in One Day at a Time that "we don't think that it's appropriate that it show up on a competitive streaming platform." Was Netflix not owning One Day at a Time a factor in its cancelation? "Ownership doesn't play a factor at all, although the cost of the season vs. the viewership is generally how we look at these things," said Holland. "The reason why the decision was so protracted between seasons two and three and then after season three for One Day at a Time was because it didn't make economic sense for us to renew the show, frankly, at either point. We love the show and we knew it had a passionate audience, and we felt it was important to continue to support it. We supported three seasons of it, but at some point, you have to make the difficult decision to say goodbye and try to look for other stories to tell and invest in that hopefully will garner larger audiences. One Day at a Time had a core, passionate but pretty small audience that didn't materially grow season over season. Frankly, we were looking for reasons to try to continue to say yes, and we just got to the point where it was hard to find them — other than knowing we loved the show and that it had a small core audience."