The other day, Bill posed a question in the comments about why do the networks not just announce their schedules rather than let all kinds of silly drama play out in public with media spinning each and every move. Bill speculated that it was PR value, but I think in the intervening time Bill actually got one of the primary answers. Probably especially due to the writers’ strike there were more “sophomore” shows this year that were given another chance, but only with orders of 13 episodes. Which brings us to the first reason:
1. To keep a show’s production staff as motivated and energized as possible.
What seems to be a primary reason heading into winter schedules is simply to keep all the ships afloat. You don’t want unhappy, unmotivated people moping around and producing television shows. If the networks know they are not going to order more, but also have no plans to yank the show from the schedule until the current order is up, until the original order is finished and the shows have been made, there is downside to telling the show “we aren’t ordering more.”
In fact, unless you planned to halt production and/or yank the show off the schedule immediately, there is no upside to letting the show know – even if you know. This might suck a little bit, but it’s just the nature of things. Imagine if after 6 episodes had been made of show XZY, network ABC knows it isn’t bringing it back for the winter. But having nothing to air in its place, decides to let the show air its full 13 episodes. If you let the people working on the shows know of that decision while there are still seven episodes to be made…lots of moping around. Not a good atmosphere for producing high quality product.
2. Negotiation leverage
Like many businesses television is a power game, with people constantly trying to wrestle for control of the upper hand. I think this is worse in some instances than others and varies network by network (this exists on cable too). I’m sure unless the ratings are just completely atrocious, or obviously very good, the discussions from the network side go something like this:
“Yeah, we’re not going to be able to bring back all of these fall shows for the winter. We’re thinking about keeping about X (number of shows) and going with Y (number of new shows) in the winter. Oh, by the way, if only your show cost $300,000 less an episode to produce, that would be soooo cool. Anyway, have a nice day.”
In all but the case of the true hit, the networks have the upper hand. So if there are five marginally performing shows on the network and they want to bring back only one of them, the network gets some leverage with whichever show they plan to keep. What’s it to the network to have them all competing, trying to make better shows and lower costs?
And to complete my list of three – and this may actually be the number one reason:
3. The networks really haven’t made final decisions on the schedules yet
It’s really simple for us to be black and white with the numbers and say “the numbers for these five shows stink, get rid of them all!” While when it comes to the numbers, it’s likely fairly black and white, the networks have to deal with a lot of real life variables that aren’t contained in spreadsheets. And especially if the scenario in the second item on the list is true, it may be a difficult process to decide which show out of five you would consider cancelling that you plan to keep.
There are also other factors we’re not always (or even usually) privy to, like how production is going on new shows, what the network thinks of those shows, etc. As more data comes in, the landscape changes and so it’s in the networks’ interest to take as much time as they possibly can.
My guess is that the above reasons have always been in play. It may be more pronounced during this season’s transition from fall to winter due to last year’s writer’s strike which if nothing else mucked up the production pipeline. On a speculative guess, the reason more shows were not cancelled earlier and even cancelled shows are getting to air their full run of episodes is that the pipeline was backed up and there just wasn’t a lot already on the bench that they could pull in.
Also, the current economic crisis brings additional pressure so I think we’re seeing more “screw it, if we paid for the episodes, we’re AIRING them!” than we normally would’ve.
Update: commenter “Riff Rafferty” nails what is probably the best reason of all — and I definitely should have (but didn’t!) think of it:
If they’ve canned the show and they plan on burning off leftover episodes (which is just about never the case at CBS), there’s one big reason they don’t announce it – and it’s not listed here. That being that advertisers don’t want to buy ad time in cancelled series. At least not for a show which isn’t a veteran.
I like what you just said,Mr. Seidman,but I have a question re something Bill|Gorman said in another thread here I didn´t really understand.He said that by letting these rumors fly around,networks would just have to deal with whatever fan backlash they got.What backlash is that,and how important is it?I ask because everybody´s always saying (and I agree) how juvenile statements like “if you cancel my favorite show I´ll never watch you again!!”are.That´s basically what I can imagine as backlash,if these people make good on their promise.
Thanks.
Bill can speak for himself, though he’s gone until at least 8pm EST. My opinion is that sort of backlash doesn’t amount to much skin off the networks’ backs and they would face it regardless of when they make the announcements, but, the longer they take to make the announcements the longer the period where we see that sort of commenting. On a guess, those sorts of comments are more annoying to Bill and I, than they are to the networks!
Hahaha,thanks.
Maybe another reason for keeping the shows in the dark is that the network execs are evil, and want to torcher the world with According To Jim. Yes, that’s it.
Very good article. Perfect for the current situations at ABC and NBC.
Sorry, but networks generally don’t keep them in the dark. For reason 1 they specifically don’t keep them in the dark. They say “ok, you guys need to do this,” and it also does lead to reason 2. By keeping them enlightened in what they expect, when expectations aren’t reached they have more negotiating power.
Execs are generally well covered when it comes to information about their future. Sometimes shows get canned real fast and sudden (like MOWE) but when a show isn’t canceled within the first month of broadcasting, generally the producers are in the know.
Remember these producers generally have multiple shows. If a network screws them over, they would just be alienating that producer. It’s not good business.
Producers definitely understand the business side of it all. They understand that if they have a 1.9 in the primary demo they’re in trouble. I don’t know of a Producer who doesn’t think of dropping below 2.0 as being the Kiss of Death. So MOWE producers knew it was coming when they saw they had a 1.4 in the primary demo. When an NBC show pulls CW numbers you have to know your chances of not getting axed are slim.
If they’ve canned the show and they plan on burning off leftover episodes (which is just about never the case at CBS), there’s one big reason they don’t announce it — and it’s not listed here. That being that advertisers don’t want to buy ad time in cancelled series. At least not for a show which isn’t a veteran.
Of course, as you’ve seen with “Lipstick Jungle,” “My Own Worst Enemy,” “Pushing Daisies” and the unwatchable “Dirty Sexy Money,” the news usually leaks out anyway…
Nick, sorry, but like me, you’re a know it all, and like me, you definitely don’t know it all.
I’m certain you’re correct for some cases, but equally certain there are instances currently (or at least as of a week ago) where not even the executive producers of shows were completely enlightened about the outcomes.
That doesn’t mean they don’t realize their shows are in trouble based on the ratings alone or feedback from the network, but that is not the same as certainty.
Robert, I assume you’re mentioning what Bryan Fuller said to the press? What about what Bryan didn’t say to the press? He mentions they haven’t had any “official,” word on the subject. He doesn’t say they haven’t had word on the subject.
I’m not saying your musings don’t have some merit, but it kind of implies that these guys are kept fully out of the loop. Generally ABC works directly with one of the exec producers and keeps them fully informed of everything from how much commercials are going for to how well the show is doing for even the most obscure demos.
Do the networks lead some productions on? SURE. PD is a perfect example.
Riff makes an excellent point. With ABC they now allow advertisers a way to see future plans. This helps the advertiser. If ABC is canceling a show it also gives them a hint of that. So the only way around that is the current ABC argument of “we’re considering bringing those shows back as FALL ONLY shows.” This way they can say “oh we’re not canceling it, yet.”
Nick, I wasn’t referring to Bryan Fuller or Pushing Daisies — I actually have no idea (other than what I read on the Internet) what that show was led to believe. My sense based on past experiences is when the producers stoop to rallying fans, and rallying media for “save our show, write ABC” campaigns, the producers actually have already have gotten some sort of official word. But that’s just what I intuit.
I might be testy due to the federal regulations around NFL games preventing me from seeing the Chargers v. Steelers game even though it was part of a national double header because the 49ers game aired on Fox – and there are BS laws about other games airing when a sold out home game is broadcast.
I agree, Riff’s reason is probably the most important reason of all.
Robert, those bastards. You don’t want to hear it was exciting right up to the end do you? Ok, now I’m a bastard too. 11 to 10. Rare score in football.
But back to subject at hand, I think your reasons are sound, but I think there is more information given than people might think from the statement “keep shows in the dark,” and that’s all I was implying.
I kept my eye on it via the Internet, but all that did was make me madder that I couldn’t see it. I agree a headline along the lines of “Why networks keep some mystery around renew or cancel decisions” would have been more accurate.
Robert– if you don’t take that back I’ll never comment on your blog again!;) LOL!
I have definitely said I would never watch a channel again after they canceled a show. Difference is, I actually mean it. I only do that in situations where it’s clear the network has no respect for their viewers (based on interviews and comments made by the studio brass). I doubt my little stand makes much of a difference, but I refuse to give a channel ad dollars when I disagree with their decisions, and just bitching about it on the web doesn’t do anything. I know it must annoy you and Bill, but really, as television viewers, what else can we do?
You’re welcome to boycott a network, but I don’t really see the “disrespect their fans” aspects the same way as you. For example, I love the show Chuck on NBC. NBC is on record saying that it really likes this show and wants to support it, and has given it a full season order. If NBC called me up right now and said, “We’re cancelling Chuck, and halting production,” I’d be disappointed but I wouldn’t feel led astray and it wouldn’t stop me from watching the Redskins on NBC for Sunday Night Football in 20 minutes. I can’t imagine taking anything the networks say (unless they said “TVbytheNumbers SUCKS!”) or do personally.
I accept that some people do, but I can’t say that I understand it.
Speaking of mysteries, is it my imagination or has NBC not yet confirmed MOWE getting dumped yet? I’ve seen a half dozen articles about it from various outlets, but I’ve yet to dig up any that had any comment from NBC. Is MOWE really, really gone? Or is NBC staying silent and hedging their bet?
By the way, I was just talking with Ben Silverman, and while he wouldn’t comment on MOWE, the one quote he would give me was, “TVbytheNumbers SUCKS!”
The guy really seems like a dick.
I remember reading an article about TV vet David McCallum, who was my first tv idol love way back when. He said he has yet to hear from NBC that they cancelled his series, The Man From U. N. C. L. E., and that was almost forty-one years ago.
Back then, most of the time you sure didn’t know if a show was cancelled-unless you had a subscription to TV Guide(perhaps)-until you tried to tune in to it for a couple of weeks, and when it never came back on, it finally sunk in.
Schmokey, they haven’t commented on it, but they did shut down production of the show.
No, when I say ‘disrespect their viewers’ I don’t mean by canceling the show. As an example: after VM was taken off the CW schedule, Dawn Ostroff said in interviews that no final decisions had been made on the show and that they still had a couple of months to decide if they wanted to buy more episodes. So fans (me included) wrote letters and bought Mars bars to no avail. I was pissed but stuff happens.
Then I read an interview where Dawn said basically that the CW never had any intention of buying more episodes, but she hoped to mitigate the fan backlash by making the ‘there’s still hope’ comments. Not only did she have no respect for whatever fan efforts we could produce, she also treated us like idiots. That’s when I knew that I was 100% done with the CW. I know lying in probably in the studio exec handbook, but to the extent that she was just so brazen and unapologetic about it made me realize that she really had absolutely no respect for her viewers and she thought she could treat them in any cavalier manner she wanted. Well I do not hold to that, and I won’t give money to sustain that. I haven’t so much as watched a commercial on the CW in over two years and counting. Just an example. I could tell you my CBS story, but that would take longer
Ah, I never really heard the full back story on why all the VM fans loathed Ostroff so much. If true that she said something like “Nah, that was just BS to get the fans off our backs!” I can see where that would rub you wrong.
the show was cancelled but we were not told prior and simply showed up to work. We were not shut down just completed the last episode. sucks
Yeah, but Dawn likely won’t have a job next year so you can be happy about that.
I won’t be happy until there is no CW!
Also, is mowecrew dirtysexyj?
Julia: to the degree we’re actually able to track that sort of thing, which is to a very high degree typically, yes.
HA! I knew dirtysexyj was a lying possible psycho, but faking being a MOWE crew member just kind of proves it.
Julia, there may not be a CW next season. I’m pretty sure Dawn is going to be shown the exit though. Her plans have been horrible. She wrote off shows that have proven to be much more popular. She also doesn’t give any love to the Thursday night lineup generally which is their strongest shows on the chart of success/promotion ratio.
Dawn seems to have no clue what she is doing. She got rid of Reba because it didn’t fit her image even though it was one of her higher rated shows. Last season, if memory serves me well, Reaper was a better rated show than Gossip Girl but Gossip Girl is there flagship while Reaper is only a mid-season replacement. To run a network it would seem the goal would be to pair popular shows with other shows to gain and keep an audience and not forcing people to watch the shows you get and like.
Rob, the number of shows she ended prematurely are amazing in comparison to ratings of shows she has today. GILMOUR GIRLS, REAPER (although it is coming back), and VERONICA MARS come to mind immediately. Those 3 were much stronger than the shows we have now.
GOSSIP GIRL is now doing better than REAPER did. Hard to say what REAPER would have done if it had a full season.
Dawn’s decisions (especially Sunday) have been so awful that the network might not last past this season. If it does, I’m pretty sure it will be without Dawn.
To be fair, Gilmore Girls ended because Alexis Bledel wouldn’t agree to come back. It’s possible CW wouldn’t offer her a sweet enough deal, but they did try to bring it back.
Julia, I’m pretty sure Alexis didn’t want to come back because the person behind the show wasn’t involved with the last season? Which I’m rather sure was a Dawn move. It’s been a while so my memory on that subject might be off.
Yeh the Creator of Gilmore Girls and her husband were removed for the final season.
Gossip Girl is doing better now but when they made the fall schedule Reaper had better number last seaon overall than GG which is just my point on why wouldn’t you have Reaper as a full season show.
Well they weren’t removed, they just couldn’t come to a deal. They wanted a two season contract at the end of season 6, but WB (it was the studio making the deal, not the network) refused, so they refused to continue. And then refused to save the show halfway through season 7 when the new guy was doing so horribly.
Julia, it was all about money. I’m pretty sure Warner couldn’t make a deal with them because CW was being cheap.
Of course it was about money, but a large part of it was the Sherman-Paladinos being unwilling to compromise. They were offered like five million for the one season (according to the rumors I recall) but wouldn’t take it because it was only one season. The point is, you can’t really blame CW for their unwillingness to compromise and Alexis’s unwillingness to come back. Dawn and CW have majorly screwed up a lot of stuff. I just don’t think Gilmore Girls can be blamed on them.
Julia, if the CW refused a 2 season deal, then the fault would be Dawn’s. I’ve always heard it was her screw up.
“My Own Worst Enemy” is in production until a few days before Thanksgiving. They are not doing the last 4 episodes of their order, just completing the current one (to air December 15). I guess its “crew members” didn’t get the memo?
Dawn of the Dead Network takes a lot of flak — including from me, when she kept shoving “Veronica Mars” down my throat and trying to pretend like it was a hit — but I thought she kind of redeemed herself with the Fall ‘08 lineup. For the first time in history, she actually put together a schedule with good flow. “Privileged” and “Stylista” got compatible lead-ins where they stood the best chance of succeeding. It didn’t happen, but they got them. Compare that to the WB, who seemed to go out of their way to pair shows that had no business being paired. (My personal favorite was “Gilmore Girls” followed by “Supernatural.” And “Everwood” followed by “Smallville.”)
As for Amy Sherman-Palladino, she chose to play hard ball, and the CW wasn’t having it. Why should they have given her a 2-year deal for a waning show in its 6th season? She had much bigger things in store, don’t you know? The smash mega hit, “The Return of Jezebel James.” Which FOX cut from 13 episodes to 7. Of which they aired 3. Over 2 weeks. (And that was still 1 more than they aired of her “Love and Marriage” sitbomb.)
Back to the advertisers thing, mind you, they can always, I guess, do what NBC did with “The Book of Daniel” and “God, the Devil & Bob” after the religious nuts drove all the advertisers away. Just have all the commercial breaks be filled with NBC promos and bottom-feeders who will buy spots in dead air, like the Burlington Coat Factory.
Riff, but VERONICA MARS and GILMORE GIRLS would be better than what they have now. Ratings wise that is. The sad fact is that Dawn never realized what she had. GILMORE GIRLS routinely got over 4 million viewers right? Isn’t that something that only SMALLVILLE does now? VERONICA MARS hovered around 3M viewers far better than PRIVILEGED & STYLISTA. REAPER is another show that the CW treated poorly.
VERONICA MARS was a hit for the CW. It will take a lot to get the CW recognized as legit by the viewing public. Also, I think EVERWOOD followed SMALLVILLE. The WB used to also have SEVENTH HEAVEN followed by BUFFY too right? That network was amusing in how they decided what shows to air and when.
For the CW to work they have to get some shows and nurture them. VERONICA MARS & REAPER were definitely shows that should have been nurtured and promoted better. If you can’t get them to grow at all then move on.
“Smallville” followed by “Everwood.” Yeah, forgive me. Dyslexic moment.
“Gilmore Girls” was done in by the creators and then the stars refusing to sign on dotted lines. I’m pretty sure Dawn didn’t set out to cancel it. I’m definitely sure it had run its course.
“Stylista” wraps December 17. “Reaper” won’t be homeless forever. While I agree The CW haven’t exactly rolled out the red carpet for it, I don’t think they’ve treated it poorly. Especially considering it’s an ABC show. They picked up additional episodes after the strike, they brought it back after the strike, and they renewed it for a second season. I’d rather see it held back for midseason than given a hopeless time slot, like Fridays at 9:00. Now “Girlfriends” — THAT was a show they treated poorly. 8 seasons and they can’t even let them shoot 1 stinking episode post-strike to wrap up the whole thing? And it was a chick show at that.
“Veronica Mars” was a giant nothing. Nobody ever watched it, and it never gave anybody any reason to. If Mandi hates Ms. Ostroff, she’d positively loathe me, because there is no way in hell I would’ve let that thing destroy time slots for 3 straight years when the quality just kept getting worse and worse. Not that it’s a good show, either, but “Gossip Girl” — “Veronica’s” heir apparent — has shown remarkable growth in its second season and is doing something “Veronica” could never do — holding its own on a night. So that right there was one good decision The CW made.
Riff, not sure I understand your VERONICA hatred. Numbers wise the show wasn’t that bad for the CW. Also GOSSIP GIRL isn’t its heir apparent. REAPER was (since it replaced it on the schedule). REAPER also pulled only slightly better numbers. REAPER also rotated with GOSSIP GIRL for most watched new show on the CW last season.
The CW treated the show poorly, but despite that it did better than PRIVILEGED has done. By poorly I am referring to cutting the season order short, putting the show on hiatus, and by having it the least promoted scripted drama on the network. Despite the fact that is was critically the most acclaimed show on the network.
I’m not sure where you get the idea the show was a giant nothing. For CW shows, it’s 2nd in DVD sales behind only SMALLVILLE and only slightly better than SUPERNATURAL.
For the least promoted drama on the network, the 2.5M average viewers it pulled was extremely strong. DVD sales are strong enough that DtV movies are being considered. This is easily one of those shows that could have done better if promoted better.
“Veronica Mars” did well in the ratings? When did this happen? Did I blink and miss it? It was a flop on UPN, and it was a flop on CW. It was a flop in households, a flop in 18-49 and a flop in their key demos (generally women 18-34). You want treated badly, try all the higher-rated shows that lost their lives in the UPN/WB merger just so Dawn could give another chance to it, because she THOUGHT “Gilmore Girls” was the perfect lead-in for it. And then it gets that lead-in and proceeds to blow 50% of it on a regular basis. If you don’t understand lead-in retention, I really don’t know what to say.
These are the household ratings for the penultimate episode of “Mars” and the last episode of “Gilmore Girls.”
Gilmore Girls – 3.1/5 – 4.9 million viewers
Veronica Mars – 1.3/2 – 2.1 million viewers
That is pathetic. Any show with no love from the network airing it would be cancelled in a matter of weeks for dropping like that.
Even more pathetic when you factor in how many viewers it lost over the course of the season. Here’s the ratings for the 3rd season premiere (and the episode of “Gilmore Girls” that preceded it.)
Gilmore Girls – 3.2/5 – 4.6 million viewers
Veronica Mars – 2.1/3 – 3.4 million viewers
If a third of the people watching the show at the beginning of the season are tired of it by the end of the season, why shouldn’t The CW be?
Forgive me, but I’m prone to laughing in the face of anyone who says “Veronica Mars” was mistreated. It got 3 seasons. It aired all its episodes. It ran during all 3 major sweeps periods all 3 years it aired. UPN pushed it hard, to the point of practically begging people to watch. If people watched it, it would still be on. Because Ostroff pretty much fell on her sword to keep it through the merger. You like “Reaper?” Great, then you understand why the flop had to die. So a new life could begin. So it was critically-acclaimed? So what? “Pushing Daisies” (which, unlike “Mars,” didn’t get a cumulative total of zero Emmy nominations) is the most critically-acclaimed show on ABC. You say that should be cancelled. Well, maybe it should. The difference is, the fan boards of that show are still filled with people who seem to enjoy it. By “Veronica’s” third season, everywhere I looked, I saw posts that were bemoaning how awful it had gotten.
By heir apparent, I mean Dawn’s pet project with a female lead in which she probably sees herself. Which is “Gossip Girl.” It’s not an exact heir apparent. Because it can anchor a night.