SitcomsOnline.com Special: Networks Selling Out? - Page 3 - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Chelsea · 07-06-2007, 09:10 PM

The things is - the folks who post here are only a small, tiny, subset of the audience. Fresh Prince is one of those shows that can be reran over and over, and many folks don't get tired of it. Don't know why, it's just that way.

Attmay · 07-06-2007, 10:31 PM

That's another thing that networks need to learn: That old saying was wrong. Familiarity doesn't breed contempt, overexposure does.

noveel · 07-07-2007, 05:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roseanne88-97

Plus, how does Fresh Prince continually get that good of ratings? There is no way possible that people repetitively watch the show over and over, airing after airing? It used to be one of my favorite shows when it came to NAN, but now I don't even dare to watch it, and I'm for sure not the only one.

N@N probably inflates their numbers but I'm guessing it's because Will Smith is a big movie star now, unlike anyone on Murphy Brown plus MB has too much topical humor that nobody understands now, eventually the mass audience will get tired of Stale Prince and N@N will start overplaying something else (probably Family Matters or Home Improvement).

Would a protest outside the N@N headquarters do any good?

friendsfan77 · 07-07-2007, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crusty

I am tired of hearing that "they need to make money argument" as a justification of airing their crap, especially considering the fact that I am paying $55 a month for a cable bill and being left unsatisfied with their stupid programming decisions.

I agree. I understand that making money is vital, it always has been and it always will be. But a need for money doesn't need that quality has to be thrown out the window.

I think everyone should have a Nielsen box. It'd be much more fair. It's all about kissing the demographic's behind. It's funny because I'm a member of said demographic as well as several other people I know and for the most part we are not satisfied with a lot of what we are seeing on television nowadays. I know it's not a huge number of people though...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ireneparalegal

I asked that same question a short time back on a certain thread abt WHO ACTUALLY LOVES/WATCHES Fresh Prince. It seemed from the people who responded that the majority DON'T LIKE IT. Because that question was a post and NOT A THREAD, I would like to see a poll on this board so we can see a bigger picture of who really actually watches it on N&N.

This is one of several shows I choose not to watch in syndication anymore because it's rerun abused into the ground. I really do like this show, but I'm afraid if I watch it a lot now, I'll wind up hating it. I haven't watched N@N or TVLand in months and this is one reason why. I love FP but the way they run it, it's like N@N thinks Christ himself is the star of the show. It's the same with Friends and Roseanne. I love both of those shows, but I don't want to get sick of them. Syndication is both a blessing and a curse.

crusty · 07-07-2007, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by friendsfan77

I agree. I understand that making money is vital, it always has been and it always will be. But a need for money doesn't need that quality has to be thrown out the window.

To add explosive fuel to this subject, the major network conglomerates net worth is in the hundreds of millions to even billions of dollars. It is not like if a specific channel does not make as much money as it did the year before they are going to have to declare bankruptcy and cancel the network. For instance, if this were the case, then CNN would have to call it quits tomorrow for being at the bottom of the ratings barrel.

They are richer then I, or most people on this forum will ever dream to be, so I really cannot feel any sympathy for them when I hear that story that they are a business and they have to make money at the viewers expense.

clarkkent · 07-07-2007, 04:03 PM

I definitely agree with the whole "sell out" issue. Most cable channels air the same shows (marathons) as they're called. They need to change their line-ups more often and show all types of shows not just what brings in the real ratings. It's gotten to the point where I don't even want to have cable anymore because they don't air the classic shows that I really want to watch. Save your money and buy the shows you really want to see on DVD. You can only stand to watch the same episodes of Fresh Prince and Roseanne so many times.

mrs.gingerhinkley · 07-08-2007, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crusty

I am tired of hearing that "they need to make money argument" as a justification of airing their crap, especially considering the fact that I am paying $55 a month for a cable bill and being left unsatisfied with their stupid programming decisions.

^

here here.

dawsongirl · 07-08-2007, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Attmay

—The average age in this country is 36. Yet advertisers only go after the 18-34 demographic. Heck, I'm IN that demographic and I couldn't care less about a lot of the stuff they expect me to like. Still, advertisers have spent too much time catering (some would say pandering) to the under 35ers that they've systematically ignored the growing segment of people over 35.

They cater to the people with the least money. Sure, they may be more impulsive, but c'mon. I never understood this practice.

Raisingdad2004 · 07-09-2007, 12:26 AM

Well Boston Legal caters to the rich, maybe networks are OK with the fact that 10 rich viewers are better than 30 poorer ones? But that doesn't mean those 30 poorer ones can't make more money, which is why networks would be catious to waste 1 hour of their schedule trying to get a small number of rich people to watch when they can stick just about anything on and get enough poorer viewers to be profitable.

I miss the days of networks targetting viewers aged 34-50s, families ... what is the closest thing to a family show these days? Two and a Half Men - a scary thought.

What happened to family dramas? Now we have CSI: Another Murderer, CSI: Rapist Edition & CSI: Serial Killers, not to mention Desperate Housewives, the killer sex addicts?

skyvolt2000 · 07-13-2007, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawsongirl

They cater to the people with the least money. Sure, they may be more impulsive, but c'mon. I never understood this practice.

The keyword is IMPULSIVE. Look at BET as the best example of catering to people with the least amount of money. Instead of creating original black sitcoms, drama and talk shows (like our Hispanic counterparts and thier networks that encourage Hispanics) they give us crappy music video shows and reruns of shows that ALREADY air in syndication on other networks. And yes this was happening before Robert Johnson sold the network to Viacom (who also owns MTV, VH1 and others).

NOBODY I know under the age of 15 watch BET. They keep appealing them and they don't have the money. They don't buy music they download it. How many times can you show an EDITED Soul Plane movie? When was the last time Soul Food: The Movie aired on BET?

And isn't rerunning shows to death killing DVD sales? I mean who is going to buy Heroes if it can be seen 50 times on tv. I noticed this about cable. HOw can any of those shows sniff DVD releases when they get reran to death especially Degrassi: Next Generation.

07-06-2007, 09:10 PM	#31
Chelsea Semi-retired Forum Veteran Join Date: Jan 07, 2001 Location: Washington Posts: 5,727	The things is - the folks who post here are only a small, tiny, subset of the audience. Fresh Prince is one of those shows that can be reran over and over, and many folks don't get tired of it. Don't know why, it's just that way.
	__________________ Chelsea Former Administrator, 2005-2012 Former Member, DVD Review Team, 2004-2010.

07-07-2007, 04:03 PM	#36
clarkkent Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Jul 01, 2007 Location: New York Posts: 32	classic tv programming I definitely agree with the whole "sell out" issue. Most cable channels air the same shows (marathons) as they're called. They need to change their line-ups more often and show all types of shows not just what brings in the real ratings. It's gotten to the point where I don't even want to have cable anymore because they don't air the classic shows that I really want to watch. Save your money and buy the shows you really want to see on DVD. You can only stand to watch the same episodes of Fresh Prince and Roseanne so many times.

07-06-2007, 10:31 PM	#32
Attmay Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 06, 2000 Posts: 137	That's another thing that networks need to learn: That old saying was wrong. Familiarity doesn't breed contempt, overexposure does.

07-09-2007, 12:26 AM	#39
Raisingdad2004 Member Forum Regular Join Date: May 05, 2004 Posts: 715	Well Boston Legal caters to the rich, maybe networks are OK with the fact that 10 rich viewers are better than 30 poorer ones? But that doesn't mean those 30 poorer ones can't make more money, which is why networks would be catious to waste 1 hour of their schedule trying to get a small number of rich people to watch when they can stick just about anything on and get enough poorer viewers to be profitable. I miss the days of networks targetting viewers aged 34-50s, families ... what is the closest thing to a family show these days? Two and a Half Men - a scary thought. What happened to family dramas? Now we have CSI: Another Murderer, CSI: Rapist Edition & CSI: Serial Killers, not to mention Desperate Housewives, the killer sex addicts?