The State of the Airwave
Oct. 29th, 2004 06:33 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
saifaiJust read an interesting article that mentioned Angel and it's role in the upcoming election. Didn't want to give you the entire article, but below are the important parts...
by Scott Nance
From SyFyPortal.com
The federal government, including the Federal Communications Commission, has eased media ownership rules significantly for several years now, enabling bigger and bigger media conglomerates to buy more and more media properties. The result has been consolidation: A small handful of Goliaths have bought all of the major television outlets, leading to fewer and fewer chances being taken on truly good, cutting-edge shows.
Like everything else in life, it all comes down to money. Television networks are no longer operations in-and-of themselves; they are simply profit or loss generators for much larger corporations, often companies whose main business may actually not even be in television. (The NBC network, for instance, is owned by General Electric.)
"The accounting focus on cost-to-profit ratio has caused the networks to emphasize cheap programs (like ‘Fear Factor’ and ‘Survivor’) that can predictably attract a younger audience," according to an online report from Changing the Channels, a project of the nonprofit Comenius Foundation. “Because advertisers will pay more for ‘young eyeballs,’ networks have canceled programs with huge ratings because they have older-skewing audiences. This practice has caused a huge loss of viewers in the 40-plus age bracket, who no longer find anything they want to watch."
Think this is still some abstract argument? Joss Whedon probably doesn’t think so. His innovative vampire series, “Angel,” is a direct victim of media consolidation.
Back in 1996, a fledgling network known as The WB took a chance on another Whedon project, a quirky show with a funny name, “Buffy The Vampire Slayer.” “Buffy” wasn't an instant success, but The WB kept it on the air and let it build an audience. The WB invested in "Buffy" for a future return, and within a year or so, the Chosen One had indeed become a breakout hit. So the investment paid off.
Fast forward about seven years. The same network kills Whedon's spinoff, “Angel,” even though “Angel” was often delivering ratings comparable to “Buffy” back in the day.
What had changed? The WB, which had already been part of the large Time Warner corporation, had been bought out in an even more massive merger with AOL. With a stock price to worry about, the folks at AOL were most concerned with maximizing profit and reducing costs.
The suits at The WB were at least as eager to please their masters at AOL by cutting costs as they were at putting on quality television, so they killed “Angel” at least in part to make way for something cheaper -- their next “Fear Factor” or “Survivor.”
*****
The article continues talking about the state of affairs over at our one life-line, Sci-Fi Channel. The former head of that station really does not have good things to say about it all. He's basically brought it all down to buying eyeballs. Which reminds me. Hubby is currently reading Donald Trump's latest book, what was it called again? Something about how to think like a billionaire? I don't remember.
Anyway, he'd said basically the same thing. He realized that the suits that make the decision don't even watch the shows they make decisions on (an issue that popped up during the Angel cancellation debaucle). He realized that money talks, so that's how he got his show on the air. Knowing that he wanted to get his show on the most important night for TV vewing, Thursdays, he marched into NBC offices and handed 'em a blank check. Well, not quite, but you get the idea. All while they couldn't take their eyes off the check and are putting up a token protest on how you "can't just come in here and buy your way into the prime time spot", they're lighting up a stogie in celebration of their big bonus. *shrugs* So, the show paid off in the end. But look how far he had to go to get his show on the aire and in front of those eyeballs?
*snort* Yeah. They're buying eyeballs alright. And apparently I've become a vicitim. There's nothing good on TV much anymore. There's a few promising shows, but I just don't watch as much as I used to.
*****
Speaking of which, there was another couple articles - one about John Billingsley and another about George Takei - that talk about the downfall of the Star Trek series. I'm talking the entire franchise. Neither one of them see it has a promising future these days. They just don't have the audience they used to. Takei gets into it a little bit when he talks about the executives not listening to fans on what they want to see with the series being partly to blame.
*****
So, that's that. I'll probably be posting this in article form on my website sometime later tonight. But that's the gist of it all.
by Scott Nance
From SyFyPortal.com
The federal government, including the Federal Communications Commission, has eased media ownership rules significantly for several years now, enabling bigger and bigger media conglomerates to buy more and more media properties. The result has been consolidation: A small handful of Goliaths have bought all of the major television outlets, leading to fewer and fewer chances being taken on truly good, cutting-edge shows.
Like everything else in life, it all comes down to money. Television networks are no longer operations in-and-of themselves; they are simply profit or loss generators for much larger corporations, often companies whose main business may actually not even be in television. (The NBC network, for instance, is owned by General Electric.)
"The accounting focus on cost-to-profit ratio has caused the networks to emphasize cheap programs (like ‘Fear Factor’ and ‘Survivor’) that can predictably attract a younger audience," according to an online report from Changing the Channels, a project of the nonprofit Comenius Foundation. “Because advertisers will pay more for ‘young eyeballs,’ networks have canceled programs with huge ratings because they have older-skewing audiences. This practice has caused a huge loss of viewers in the 40-plus age bracket, who no longer find anything they want to watch."
Think this is still some abstract argument? Joss Whedon probably doesn’t think so. His innovative vampire series, “Angel,” is a direct victim of media consolidation.
Back in 1996, a fledgling network known as The WB took a chance on another Whedon project, a quirky show with a funny name, “Buffy The Vampire Slayer.” “Buffy” wasn't an instant success, but The WB kept it on the air and let it build an audience. The WB invested in "Buffy" for a future return, and within a year or so, the Chosen One had indeed become a breakout hit. So the investment paid off.
Fast forward about seven years. The same network kills Whedon's spinoff, “Angel,” even though “Angel” was often delivering ratings comparable to “Buffy” back in the day.
What had changed? The WB, which had already been part of the large Time Warner corporation, had been bought out in an even more massive merger with AOL. With a stock price to worry about, the folks at AOL were most concerned with maximizing profit and reducing costs.
The suits at The WB were at least as eager to please their masters at AOL by cutting costs as they were at putting on quality television, so they killed “Angel” at least in part to make way for something cheaper -- their next “Fear Factor” or “Survivor.”
*****
The article continues talking about the state of affairs over at our one life-line, Sci-Fi Channel. The former head of that station really does not have good things to say about it all. He's basically brought it all down to buying eyeballs. Which reminds me. Hubby is currently reading Donald Trump's latest book, what was it called again? Something about how to think like a billionaire? I don't remember.
Anyway, he'd said basically the same thing. He realized that the suits that make the decision don't even watch the shows they make decisions on (an issue that popped up during the Angel cancellation debaucle). He realized that money talks, so that's how he got his show on the air. Knowing that he wanted to get his show on the most important night for TV vewing, Thursdays, he marched into NBC offices and handed 'em a blank check. Well, not quite, but you get the idea. All while they couldn't take their eyes off the check and are putting up a token protest on how you "can't just come in here and buy your way into the prime time spot", they're lighting up a stogie in celebration of their big bonus. *shrugs* So, the show paid off in the end. But look how far he had to go to get his show on the aire and in front of those eyeballs?
*snort* Yeah. They're buying eyeballs alright. And apparently I've become a vicitim. There's nothing good on TV much anymore. There's a few promising shows, but I just don't watch as much as I used to.
*****
Speaking of which, there was another couple articles - one about John Billingsley and another about George Takei - that talk about the downfall of the Star Trek series. I'm talking the entire franchise. Neither one of them see it has a promising future these days. They just don't have the audience they used to. Takei gets into it a little bit when he talks about the executives not listening to fans on what they want to see with the series being partly to blame.
*****
So, that's that. I'll probably be posting this in article form on my website sometime later tonight. But that's the gist of it all.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-10-29 07:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-29 07:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-29 07:56 pm (UTC):)