Should bubble shows end the season with a cliffhanger?

[TMC]

https://uproxx.com/sepinwall/timeles...cliffhanger/2/

In reaction to Lucifer's cancelation, co-showrunner Joe Henderson tweeted, "we created a season finale with a huge cliffhanger so that there was no way Fox could cancel us." But as Alan Sepinwall points out, showrunners have been doing this for the past two decades, mostly to no avail. "When showrunners assume a cliffhanger will save them, they’re ignoring decades of evidence to the contrary, and often leaving a bad taste in the mouths of their fans, all for a futile gesture that will have no impact on survival," says Sepinwall, adding: "It’s naive at best, and self-destructive to the work they’ve been doing for months or years."

[Christopher]

Originally Posted by TMC

co-showrunner Joe Henderson tweeted, "we created a season finale with a huge cliffhanger so that there was no way Fox could cancel us."

That's the most stupidest thing I've ever heard. I don't get why showrunners think this. It's gone back way before two decades when shows on the bubble would leave on a cliffhanger thinking it'll guarantee them a renewal. Shows need a beginning, middle, and end every season with all the stories wrapped up so a new one can start at the beginning of the following year. Cliffhangers are nothing more than a slap in the face to loyal fans who stick with a show no matter how bad it can get. It sounds like Joe Henderson needs to learn how to properly respect fans before getting involved with another series.