I theorized that the move to put Jay Leno at 10pm every weeknight indicated that NBC was giving up on competing in prime-time.
Now Jeff Zucker has confirmed it (via MediaPost):
“What does No. 1 in prime time mean anymore?” he asked, adding that the traditional measuring stick has lost relevance.
“I don’t think we’ll ever be able to say, ‘NBC is No. 1 in prime time,’” Zucker said at an industry event.
He’s falling back on his (and Ben Silverman’s “aggregate viewing”) canard. Problem is, today everything but traditional TV advertising is pennies, and it’s not clear NBC will do any better than the competition in the years to come when it is significant.
DVRs, online video and other factors have moved the needle. A more appropriate metric is aggregate viewing across on-air, online, VOD, iTunes, etc.–a gauge where the NBC hit “The Office” performs well.
Still, he said the Leno move is not a white flag–just a reaction to new dynamics. “We’re not proclaiming defeat,” he said. “I don’t think anyone thinks Fox is any less of a network because they program two hours in prime time.”
Even so, he does admit the current position NBC is in.
“Sometimes, you see the world more clearly when you’re flat on your back,” he said.
Perhaps claiming that the entire broadcast TV business is in the tank makes your sad position in it more excusable.
But he said the broadcasting industry needs “to be honest” with itself about the hurdles it faces and not “wish it were 1987.”
Lots more of the Zucker wisdom to be found at MediaPost
So yesterday Zucker was going on about how Hulu and online viewing is a failing business, but today he says that it really does make NBC a success?
As I have said before, and will say until I’m blue in the face, NBC could be #1 again, even with Leno (or despite him), but they never will be because they refuse to take risks. They have dug their own grave and are burying themselves.
Zucker is a tool. How he still has a job amazes me.
For me, NBC brought me ER, Friends, Will and Grace. When their top shows peaked, they became complacent They should have kept innovating, instead of now commissioning AI copycats
Could not agree with you more, Julia. NBC is a joke. Wonder what producers and studios with hot new shows are thinking now about whether or not to go to NBC?
“Hey, let’s go pitch this prospective hit show to that sucky network that just threw in the towel!!”
Man, Zucker is no better at his job than Sliverman is at his. Someone at NBCU need to start cleaning house. Because the last time NBC fell to the bottom of the barrell, a new guy came in and, what do you know, took them back up to #1 across the board.
Not being able to recognize the cyclical nature of the business, and not being about able to recognize how your execs failures have put you in this position, is pathetic. How did he ever rise to this position in the first place?
Oh, wait, I forgot, this is television.
Why don’t they just get rid of Zucker and Ben Silverman and bring in people who can bring to #1 or at least #2. Bonnie Hammer, the head of Universal Cable managed to turn around USA and make it #1 and has made Sci-Fi more mainstream so I think should be be a shoo in to replace Silverman or even Zucker.
“I don’t think we’ll ever be able to say, ‘NBC is No. 1 in prime time,’” Zucker said at an industry event.
As long as Zucker and Silverman are around, I’m sure this is true. But with some new leadership, they could be number 1 again. On top of all his other failures, Zucker’s defeatist attitude isn’t going to do NBC any favors in terms of revenue. Would *you* want to advertise with the network that has proclaimed themselves that they’ll never be #1 where it counts again?
@Nick C, “Zucker is a tool. How he still has a job amazes me.”
My theory is that GE/Immelt really doesn’t know what to do with/make of the entire television business. It doesn’t fit the rest of the company, so they just ignore it.
Bill, there are enough smart people at Universal to know that these guys are a joke. To think of everything Lew Wasserman did to help form TV into what it is…
They need to clean house. I feel for Angela, but she knew what she was getting into.
What is truly amazing is that NBC seems to be confusing “broadcast television viewing levels will never be the same again,” which is a true statement, with “we can never be #1 again,” which is a false statement that is more of a self-fufilling prophecy than any sort of intelligent comment on the state of their business.
Unless Zucker meant, “So long as I am in chage, we will never be #1 again.” Perhaps he was just trying to secure his retiement fund.
pathetic. as a company you dont announce something like this with that choice of words.
Why does Zucker still have a job? Who wants an executive who thinks that no matter what he does, the company isn’t going to do well?
I agree with Nick C, it is amazing that this idiot is still in charge, the man single-handedly destroyed NBC with catastrophic decisions.
My favourite part is the one where he compares FOX, that kicks even CBSs ass, to that now patetic (because of him) excuse for a network.
I should add that BS did a good job with what he was good for. He has helped make NBC run a much tighter ship and make more money from things they weren’t taking advantage of.
Still he and Zucker can’t do anything more for NBC. It would be smart for NBC to kick them and bring in some people with the right craziness to take NBC back to the top with the new tightened up network.
Surely claiming that the network you run is never going to be number 1 again is the kind of comment that should put your job in jeopardy? I get that he wants to emphasis that network television needs a new more inclusive way of factoring in the ways audiences can now watch but seriously telling people that your network is unlikely to ever be number one again is just insanity.
Seriously…”what does being #1 in primetime mean?” It means bringing in more money in ad revenue than your competetors, you moron. What kind of stupid question is that? He’s looking for excuses to justify why NBC gets its rear handed to it by the three other networks. Who’d ever want to beat their competetors and make money? But by all means, throw in the towel now, because you’ve driven NBC into a black hole that it will not escape from until you and Silverman are long gone. I think a monkey would be more successful than these two clowns.
“My favourite part is the one where he compares FOX, that kicks even CBSs ass, to that now patetic (because of him) excuse for a network.”
To an extent I think the Fox comparison is a fair one – in terms of batting away criticism of moving Leno to 10 its absolutely perfect. Fox only programmes two hours or primetime a night but nobody considers them less of a network anymore and they are in fact the most successful network where it matters.
Ben Silverman did a good job at Reveille and did takes risks with shows like The Office, Ugly Betty and The Tudors but he just didn’t cut it at NBC. My guess would be when he does get the boot from NBC, he will get a role with The Shine Group and produce TV shows whih is where his strenghs lies.
Alex, I agree. Zucker deflects with the “Fox only programs 2 hours” when the real issue is “Fox kicks our ass”.
The problem with the FOX comparison is that FOX’s 10pm hour is not counting in the network averages. NBC’s still will be.
It’s really kind of sad how quickly they’ve run this network in to the ground. There was a time years ago when I pretty much watched nothing but NBC. I didn’t need to; they had all the good shows. I didn’t watch anything on ABC or CBS, and I only watched one show on FOX and CW/WB. If you had told me then that one of my favorite shows was going to be airing on CBS, I would have laughed at you. I’d never in my life watched CBS, and I hadn’t watched ABC since the mid-90s. Almost everything I wanted was on NBC. Today, my viewing is much more evenly spread among the networks. Even without Zucker, they wouldn’t have been able to keep their #1 status going forever, but such a rapid decline is just pathetic.
Julia, and even if it didn’t, FOX would still crush it like a bug. Those “new dynamics” he’s reacting to is every new show on NBC crashing and burning miserably.
Jon, Reveille is and was one of the worst production companies in the business in terms of successful shows. However, financially it was a well run company.
The fact is that Reveille still gave us shows like DATE MY MOM and SHEAR GENIUS. There was nothing risk taking about what Reveille did. They brought THE OFFICE to the USA, which was a no brainer. Agreeing to co-produce projects spear headed by the likes of Working Title and Silent H weren’t “risks.”
BS is a salesman. He sold himself to NBC. Unfortunately he sold them a lemon.
Zucker is a genius. If you set the bar so low, and then go just above it, you consider it a success, that’s what he’s doing and the execs above him are believing it. It’s really smart actually.
Okay…so if NBC is giving up, what does that mean for it’s Fall lineup? Does this mean that Leno is their “big risky/innovative” move for the Fall, and they’re going to stick with the shows they have (try to restart/reboot/resuscitate Heroes and amp up their other flagging shows)? Or are they going to wipe the slate and put stock in new shows, reality or otherwise?
FrankJ, slate wiping is highly unlikely. I’ve got to believe that sticking with what they have is the low risk play, and in general Zucker and Silverman have gone low risk.
OK, except for Kings, big budget alternate history/fantasy based on the King David story.
You know KINGS would likely do better if Ian McShane was allowed to cuss it up like on DEADWOOD.
NBC was THE network in the 90s and it’s kinda depressing to see it going down. Although I have to say that the talkshow at 10pm is not that bad an idea, it saves a lot of money and Jay still attracts viewers. Maybe ABC will follow when they’re going down;)
I think the winner of this whole thing is Fox. They don’t have to worry about the 10pm-slot and their shows are still doing well.
Bill, in addition, I also have to wonder how flops like Bionic Woman and Knight Rider factor into their risk averse mood.
so is this good or bad for the bubble-shows, or does it matter
@Julia, you state: “NBC could be #1 again, even with Leno (or despite him), but they never will be because they refuse to take risks.”
I somewhat disagree. NBC is taking huge risks – just not the type of risks that fit a standard, broadcast-network, prime-time definition of the word.
Leno is a risk. *Profit at the expense of ratings* is a risk. Airing somewhat unique, may-or-may-not-intentionally-be-miniseries (Crusoe, Kings) is risky. The DirecTV/FNL deal was a risk. Giving up on prime-time, broadcast television is, in itself, a risk.
NBC may well be risking, even creating, failure as a broadcast network. If NBCU still shows profits for GE, though, what’s the real risk?
clutz, I disagree with some of your assessments of risk. For a company, risk isn’t simply “taking chances”, risk is committing money to uncertain returns. Spending lots of money for an uncertain future return = risk.
Getting DirecTV to subsidize FNL = less risk
Going with a low budget Leno show with an effective ratings floor = less risk.
As for Crusoe & Kings, I don’t think they were any more risky in that sense than starting any other show from scratch. In retrospect they were certainly bad choices, but its hard to say they were extra “risky” in an economic sense.
clutz, NBC is killing the brand. Keeping shows like FNL and going with Leno may show short term profits, but they are quickly turning the network into something CW will regularly be able to beat very soon. They will never be able to turn big profits on any show, and it won’t be long before even FNL-like deals won’t be able to keep NBC in the green, even on individual shows.
I could get NBC to #1 in three years.
I could do it in 2.
Terrible management. If you look back in history, during the early 80’s heyday of CBS with Dallas, NBC did not have one show in the top 20. By the mid to late 80’s they had the Cosby Show, Cheers, Family Ties and they ruled TV. There is no reason, under proper management, that NBC cannot be a powerhouse again. They have been in the same situation before and turned around so why not again?
Out of interest, who does everyone think could turn around NBC? I have already suggested Bonnie Hammmer to take over Zucker’s job and Angela Bromstad for Ben Silverman’s job.
The fact that USA Network is Number 1 suggests that not everyone at NBC Universal are complete idiots.
ITA with moving Bonnie Hammer over to Zucker’s job, but would hate to see her leave the cable side. She’s done such amazing work with USA, SciFi, etc.
Can we throw Nina Tassler on the pile with Zucker? I’m still fuming over “Jericho” and “Moonlight”…
Maybe if the advertisers should let up on their demographics. How many younger people actually even watch prime time TV if they are at work? Yes, they are paying consumers but just not for the crap advertised on those shows. Nobody I know even has a Nielsen box. If you look at history for NBC, Cheers was very low rated at the time but what did they do? Have a good 11 seasons. “Hill Street Blues” was on the verge of cancellation when they swept the Emmy’s and it went on to a healthy 7 seasons. How the hell did “Miami Vice” survive on Friday nights if it’s such a wasteland? Perhaps the generation of this prized demographic is not the same as the baby boomer generation. I do believe a lot of people don’t want to bother watching TV anymore because they know as soon as they start watching it, it will be cancelled or shuffled around the schedule until it is. Nobody wants to take chances anymore and see if a show can survive past one episode. Look at you guys. Already whining about pilots that haven’t even been filmed yet! Maybe if TV executives and advertisers could take a look and see what the average person is watching. What viewers enjoy. Not some measly sampling. We know the drill. If it’s intelligent then it will be gone. So? Why bother? I’ve heard more about books being promoted than TV shows. Better to read. That way you have a clearly defined ending without being cancelled.
Yeah because God knows CBS is doing horribly and that poor Tassler is the reason!
Tracy, that whole argument isn’t based on facts. Sorry.
The shows on NBC just suck now-a-days…
Shows like “The Office” and “30 Rock” are funny, but are nothing compared to “Seinfeld” and “Friends.”
If the shows today were just as good as “Seinfeld” and “Friends” were, then people would be tuning in.
Alex s., opinions on quality are almost purely subjective. Thus is the nature of opinions. I happen to like all four sitcoms you just mentioned. Oddly enough you mentioned my EXACT four favorite sitcoms. However my order od ranking them would be different than you. As a marketeing student, I have to say nbc’s troubles are far deeper, more complex, and more expensive to fix than simply finding “quality” material. The fact is that they don’t know how to advertise their shows or themselves AS A NETWORK! Zucker’s comments don’t help at all. In fact his attitude has a negative effect on them ever regaining anyplace but 4th place.
@Nick “Yeah because God knows CBS is doing horribly and that poor Tassler is the reason!”
You. Just. Don’t. Understand.
The killer of Moonlight and Jericho must answer for her crimes against humanity!
Bill, that’s cool. Can we give her a raise for it?
???
theirs no reason why the network cant find a hit, what type of attitude is this though? i cant believe this guy still works for the company… aren’t you supposed (and being paid) to show some confidence in what your representing? LoL
I concur with a few of the sentiments regarding the “clean the slate.” NBC does not even have 1 top 20 show for the season. That is sad for a major network. Clean the slate NBC, because your must see tv, has become a door MAT(must avoid television) This fall NBC will essently be programming only 8 hours? They have dropped from Major to mini. NBC will mean Nolonger Broadcasting Company.
Bill and Julia,
I think I understand the “risk” vs. “no risk” concept a bit better now. I guess committing less money = less risk. Still, I think lack of financial investment to broadcast, prime-time network televsion, as it currently exists, is somewhat risky. The risk NBC is taking here is the risk of ceasing to exist a broadcast network. But with cable, satellite, and very-new-to-the-game online viewing options, how long until there is no such thing as free-to-the-public broadcast network television? Is Zucker useless, a nut case, or ahead of his time?
On the other side, committing money in the face of uncertain returns is not something CBS does much, either. If it’s not a criminal procedural, and if it doesn’t garner 10 million viewers consistently, CBS cans it PDQ. They went lower-risk with Flashpoint because they invested less money. They’ve cranked out how many seasons of Survivor and Amazing Race, as they are relatively low-cost productions which garner good ratings? They’ve made how many CSI offshoots, and now an NCIS spinoff is in the works? CBS won’t take those “Seinfeldesque” risks much – three and a half seasons of abysmal ratings before it became the cultural icon it is today. Which network did that? – I know, it was a different world under different leadership at NBC back then. Anyway, CBS doesn’t have to be risky in its current position. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it (and clone it a few times).
Precisely, clutz. When you are #1 you don’t need to take risks. When you are #4, and risking the possibility of #5, you take lots of risks.
On the subject of Survivor, it was actually a zero risk venture for CBS in its first season. Mark Burnett came to CBS with all the advertising and sponsorships already in place. I believe the story I heard actually had other networks turn him down despite this.
Um, wow.
GE should take this as a letter of resignation and show him the door. In today’s ecomony I’m sure there are a few…thousand executive types who need work.
A network has to take risks. In the summer of 2004, ABC spend millions and millions advertising Lost and Desperate Housewives in unconventional ways. It worked. Lost was also the most expensive pilot to ever air, costing more than $10 million. But it got people interested, and in the end, ABC got two big hits series that were able to launch other series.
Zucker is a tool. NBC, if I’m not mistaken, has declined every single season for the past 5 years, and was only up in 2001/2002 because of the Winter Olympics (they ended up winning that season).
CBS took a risk with Survivor and CSI and there are now the number one network in viewers, CSI was originally aired on Fridays behind The Fugitive and moved to Thursday after it became outrating The Fugitive.
FOX was in a very bad state when many of its shows like Ally McBeal and The X Files had either ended or in decline. 24 was a risk due to its format but became a hit and American Idol was a risk even thought the format had proved popular in the UK as this type of show was relativly new to the US but it became a monster hit.
Zucker sounds like a blogger hating on himself. This guy is dead weight. How can he compare himself to Fox when Fox actually has developed and promoted shows to make it a top channel. What has Zucker done since he was booted up from the Today Show? He took a great line up of comedies and decided to run them on Thursdays in the valley of death instead of letting them thrive on Tuesdays. He’s revived bad shows from the 70s and 80s. He’s expanded the Today Show. He’s now expanded the Tonight Show into primetime. He’s completely slaughtered the peacock. And then he dares to say that his network will never be #1 in prime time? Why isn’t he fired? Why isn’t brass screaming at him that if he can’t get them into #1 – he’s fired? Why isn’t the star of Fat Actress on the free cheese line?
He blew Chopping Block. How did they cast that many bland couples for the competition? Those people wouldn’t be cast in a Bravo series. Sure the morons on Hell’s Kitchen can’t cook – but they’re all trainwrecks. These people are talentless and boring.
I’m still surprised Zucker didn’t do Homeland Security. But I’m still betting that’s considered a community service project for a network executive that was smuggling narcotics inside stolen babies.
Zucker can’t deliver. He’s the Bernie Madoff of network executives – except the people he’s stolen billions from are still clients and sending him more cash.
Jon, like I said a few comments ago, Survivor was a no risk venture. It was already all paid for when Burnett brought it to CBS.
Julia, must have missed that but I bet even CBS didn’t expect to become a huge hit with 50m for the finale.
Very true. It was pure luck. But it wasn’t a risk.
Why is everyone suggesting Bonnie Hammer? Isn’t she the one who decided to change Sci-Fi’s name to Sy Fy? Sci-Fi gets horrible ratings under Bonnie Hammer, and changing the channel’s name to make people think of syphillis isn’t going to help things. The only good thing Sci-Fi has done lately is Ani-Monday.
wow this pisses me off i have always rooted for NBC thinking they can turn things around i think there lineup has many many different choices but they cant seem to make people tune in?……..but saying your GIVING UP!? so what you had a few bad years get over it and think of better ideas
Zucker the dumb fucker needs to be fired.
Yeah, that’s the guy you want leading you. The man who thinks you’ll never be number one
This makes me really, really sad to hear him say that. What the hell!? You just said you’ll never be #1 again? That’s ridiculous. Talk about giving up. This makes me sad because most of my favorite shows in my lifetime have been on NBC (Friends, ER, Will and Grace, Law and Order (back in the day), Chuck, The Office). I don’t believe that NBC CAN’T be #1 again and for the man in charge to say that…he should be FIRED.
(oh and I forgot to mention Seinfeld as well, another favorite!)
At the least this is a terrible choice of words, and probably he shouldn’t have opened his mouth at all.
If he means, which i suppose he does, that he never cares to be #1 in total viewers again, fine. Then say THAT. Don’t make vague references to not being #1 ever again.
But then, the more I think about it, why say that you’ll never be #1 in viewers ever again, even if that measurement is futile? Even if all you care about is demo, or some extremely specific demo, like CW… it could never hurt to be tops in the category you care about AND total viewers (even if it doesn’t mean more revenue, it’s not a negative).
So why open your mouth at all? What does he gain? Bad publicity? Getting ripped on various media nationwide? It’s mind blowing, really.
Well, this IS the network that couldn’t even get a bump from the Super Bowl. Fox started gaining ratings when they picked up the NFL in the mid 90’s, and CBS went down hill when they lost it. It’s proven that people will go wherever the NFL is. It’s the job of the network to capitalize on those viewers. NBC has done none of that. NBC is now the only US network to air the Super Bowl to be in 4th place and not get any sort of bump in other programming. Sad. complaining that people don’t watch TV the same way doesn’t mean anything when people do the same thing with programs on other networks and you are still in almost last place.
Zucker should just resign. People who project success will be successful. If you say you’ll fail, you will. resigning to that fact is not gonna help things.
Julia Z, unless you have figures that I’ve never seen, there is no long term bump from the Super Bowl on any network. FOX got NFL on a weekly basis, which NBC has as well, which keeps its average up nicely in the fall. But this isn’t a case where no one knows about NBC and needs something like football to introduce them to the network. NBC and Zucker are in trouble for a lot of reasons, but the Super Bowl not bringing them out of fourth place is not one of them.
What can be sad that hasn’t been said already? The big wigs at NBCU need to fire Zucker and Silverman. There’s no reason they should still have jobs.
holy shit Julia shut the hell up all you do is bitch and annoy people on this blog leave already
dude, you’re complaining about someone on a blog. Don’t read what she comments if it bothers you that much.
thats so sad nbc used to be the greatest network but its gone down so fast
but you never know ABC was down and out not too long ago but it found its way back in
I think if nbc brought Americas got talent out of the summer it could help them a lot
and what happened to American Gladiators?
Tom, we like her and hope she stays. You’re welcome to leave though.
America’s Got Talent might possibly work in the fall, because then it wouldn’t have to compete against American Idol. But then NBC would have even less time for scripted shows (and this is where the Chuck fans come on and turn this into a Chuck thread)
American Gladiators has been canceled from I understand from futoncritic
Jared, you’re correct about American Gladiators. It’d done.
Jared said:
“and this is where the Chuck fans come on and turn this into a Chuck thread”
Ooo! Ooo! Allow me to do that!
Everytime Zucker lowers his expectations, it raises the prospects of Chuck coming back, right? Right?
I realize that’s one hell of a leap and i’m mostly just saying that to try to spark a Chuck-centric conversation just for the heck of it, but i’m bored. Western Kentucky’s at halftime.
Well, as long as we’re *expected* to turn this into a Chuck thread, Jesse, I suppose we might as well! And here I thought we’d been on pretty good behavior this week.
Now, If Leno was used to help rebuild the network, keeping him on at 10PM then rebuilding a Mon to Sturday 8PM to 10PM schedule, with promotion outside the box, it may not be that bad, then in year 2 cut Leno 3 nights a week (unless somehow this experiment worked)…I could support that, They could keep Mon:(SciFi)8PM:Newshow, 9PM:rotate (Chuck, Heroes, Medium, 13-15 episodes each)Tue:8PM:Biggest Loser, 9PM:new show, Wed: 8-9(Law and Order, L&A:SVU,L&A:CI 13-15 Episodes each) Thur: Comedy Done Right(Office,Parks,Earle,30 Rock, & new mid seson comedy try outs) Fri:8PM:Americas Got Talent 9PM:New show, Sat:8PM:America gots Talent(results show)9PM:(Life/FNL)10PM:Dateline Sun:Football
What exactly (if anything) does all this mean for the shows that look to be cancelled, or the shows that are “on the bubble”? I read above that someone thought that the network would likely keep its current lineups and play it safe.
well, they need to cut a few things if they’re giving the 10 PM slot to Leno. I’d say the heck with what NBC has now. They’d do better with reruns of their successful shows from the 90’s. Seinfeld, Friends, Frasier, etc. Not that I’m saying they should do that, but IMO it would be better than the crap they play now. At least they have ER…ooops…off the air after this season. At least they still have Law & order…but who the heck are these people on this show? I don’t recognize any of them. Never mind that one. Hrm…anything I want to watch? Deal or No Deal…ooops…been pulled off the schedule only to run out the remaining episodes.
Well, I guess I’ll just watch reruns of good programming instead of the crap they subject us to today.
In regards to NBC not taking any risks, don’t you think My Own Worst Enemy was a risk? They spent a lot of money advertising a show that had a rather unusual plot.
Andrew, I don’t think MOWE was *particularly* risky for a new one hour drama, again by a simple business definition of risk, spending money today for an uncertain return tomorrow. If it was unusually costly it would be more risky, but I am not plugged into its relative cost vs. other new one hour dramas. Certainly the Olympic promo time had opportunity costs that could have gone to other shows, but since it didn’t seem to do any good, how do you value that?
As for creative risk, I’d be a terrible judge of that.
As an examples of television strategies that assume *less* business risk:
- CBS sharing production costs with CanadianTV for Flashpoint
- NBC getting DirecTV to subsidize the cost of Friday Night Lights
- NBC putting Leno at 10pm weekdays. Much less cost (lower risk), Prior ratings track record (less uncertainty)
i think some additional types of risks could also be changing your business model. for instance airing drastically different types of shows. for instance if cbs was to all of a sudden commit to a two-hour singing competition. for nbc, it doesnt seem so far fetched, but for cbs it would be not be their status quo. also, going after a totally different demographic than previously sought. that could be fairly risky depending on how radical a shift it was.
“I don’t think we’ll ever be able to say, ‘NBC is No. 1 in prime time,’”
I would be truly fascinated to hear what Jack Welch thinks of this statement.
I disagree with a lot of comments about NBC not taking risks lately. NBC HAS taken some risks on some amazing programs (i.e. The Black Donnallys, Studio 60). However, they just didn’t know how to position them. So in that sense, it amazes me that Ben and Jeff are still in power. Seriously, both of those shows I used as examples were put in Mondays at 10p. Hello, CSI:Miami KILLS anything against it, ratings-wise! Even ABC knows that; which is why they usually position low-cost, comparibly successful alternatives against it. Those shows don’t stand a chance, so putting them in that time slot is just mind-boggling.
Also, with Kings, it WAS going to have a decent spot on Thurs 10p, but they moved it to friggin Sundays?! What was the thought on that?! We all know that the thought was to promote Southland for the ER exec, but that doesn’t help out the network in the least.
So I would agree that for the most part they play it safe and vanilla, but they do buy shows with great potential; only to not know how to properly position them.
I agree with julia and a few others
How good is the team gonna be if the coach dosent think the team can be number one eventually?
un beliveable he said that
What kind of leader/CEO says his company sucks?
NBC=nothing but crap
Too bad like i said
im watching fewer and fewer shows from the peacock these days
Seems like Zucker should dress up as the fat lady in a viking suit and start clearing his throat
the towel has been thrown
someone was talking SYFY-was the name shange necessary?
used to be a channel i watched often now as withNBC less and less
seems they are running repeats instead of new shows
all the good shows are gone or leaving the rest are uninspired or reality campy junk…
So i disagree whole heartedly on HAMMER being a gd choice.
Bill,
I think your theory is accurate. I think they have given up on on completing for the lucrative 18-49 demo and going for CBS’s 50+ crowd with an inexpensive nightly dose of Leno during the 10 pm slot.
Zucker’s statement about him not seeing his network as #1 again tells me that he has thrown up his hands. Some of their shows have been wonderfully written and produced, but because NBC didn’t know what to do with them, they floundered in crummy time slots. As soon as ER dropped from the top ten, then should have moved it to another night. Instead, they kept the over-bloated behemoth in a prime location and took good programming off the air for so long that their viewers had to go somewhere else to fill that time.
Please are creatures of habit , so if a show (like, let say CHUCK) goes on hiatus for almost two months for no real reason, then viewers will look to filling their time with the newly positioned HOUSE, or fall into sitcoms like THE BIG BANG THEORY and HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER. These shows become their comfort food and then, out of said habit, they won’t switch back. They’re already involved with these new (to them) characters. Why go back?
This strategy does not work and just alienates the viewers. That’s why NBC won’t be #1 again. They don’t have a clue on how to program their network. Find someone who really does (someone who understands how to position scripted programming), and let them do their job.
Rowan brings up a good point. It’s an argument I had a few years back with a TV Exec. You can’t abandon the repeat. Reruns keeps your audience from straying in large numbers. NBC is just in a bad spot. It’s not an enviable one for sure.
Still I could turn it around in one season.
Nick, name that tune.
LOL wow Nick C…now that’s some serious confidence there…
They go out of their way to NOT develop multi camera comedies which brought some of their highest rated shows — The cosby show turned nbc around in one season — but they insist on everything being single camera and it does not bring in the ratings. When will they learn?
I know most of you are joking, but if anyone on this blog could turn around NBC in 1, 2 or 3 seasons, they certainly would be too busy and successful to spend any time here. This site is the very definition of an armchair quarterbacks’ convention. That’s what makes it so fun (usually).
We should all keep taking the pills at the recommended dose…
Back into la la land – I wholeheartedly agree that Hammer has killed the Syphilis Channel, for which I would consign her to the Jericho/Moonlight/Life/Pushing Daisies/Stargate(All)/Insert name of favorite canceled show here Circle of Hell.
With BSG gone… everyone just keep their g0d@mn dirty ape hands off Supernatural – you feel me
PS Dollhouse was MUCH better tonight – and I was expecting “amazing episode #6″
Capnbob, you’d be shocked at what kind of people post on blogs or on internet sites. You’d be more shocked to find out who reads them.
The biggest problem in my mind of most TV execs is their separation from society. The longer you’re in the industry the more separated you become. To have a good idea of what people want to watch, you need to understand every day people. That is something Execs are too detached to do. So they use “panels,” and panels are imho part of the problem.
Take comedy for instance. The industry thing to do is attach a stand up comic to a show. It has worked for a long, long, long period of time. However these comics are “attached.” The producers and Network still run the show. The most successful shows that had comedians were CONTROLLED by the comedians. THE COSBY SHOW and SEINFELD immediately come to mind. The comics were big enough to demand control and hold out for a gig until they got what they wanted.
What would be smart would be to go find the comics and let them control the show and what it is about, etc. Why? They’re comedians! It’s their job to make people laugh. They understand comedy better than just about any producer or exec.
I tell you if I had the power I’d go get Jerry and say “you’re VP in control of Comedy Production, go get us talent.” Jerry would also LOVE to do it. He has long shared the same opinion as me, and I’m know he’d love to prove our way is better.
That is just one aspect, and I’m sure the others who stated they could turn around NBC likely could because they’re living closer to reality than Zucker or BS.
why don’t NBC Universal do the right thing and clean house and fire the people who screwed NBC so bad, it’s in last place, as well as people who ruined their cable channels that don’t perform as well as they used to (The Weather Channel is the same thing but was done in by the old owners Landmark before NBC-U bought it out last summer)
was gonna post a link here but i wasnt sure if i am allowed here
never seen one before
there was talk earlier about the change to the name sci fi to SY FY
its an article on scifi wire
scifi president dave howe describes the name change and plans for the fututre of scifi-the channnel- also i think it gives a good indication of what NBC-U are thinking for their channels
So why they are doing what they are doing
though i disagree its working…
has anyone else seen/read this?
can the link be posted here?
sry forgot to say its about the panels and focus groupsi think nick c and rowan got it on the nose…
We’ve seen this all too often, all it takes is ONE hit show to turn a network around. A few years ago everyone was talking about how ABC was tanked, then along came “Desperate Housewives.”
FOX is only strong due to “American Idol” once that dies, FOX will struggle. The reality TV programming became strong because actors and writers have outpriced themselves in the market.
It amazes me the amount of GOOD TV that was made at 39 NEW episodes a year by ONE writing staff. Then the number of episodes went down and the quality was spread out over teams of writers.
There is TONS of talent out there but no one looks for it. Why are the Simpsons repeating storyline after storyline, when you can go to dozens of websites with suggestions for stories that would be great. They aren’t scripts but ideas.
TV is the issue not NBC. NBC will come around when they hit a Cosby or the next big thing, then milk it to death. Just like all the networks do. Remember “Friends” was an attempt to recreate “Seinfeld” and so on and so on and so on.
NBC should give low budget shows to writers who are BRAND NEW who want only a chance.
xxgatorxx, Yes, you can post links, but only one per post or the spam filter will hold it captive (though it occasionally does that with only one link).
Eric Post, You’re right, it only takes one or two real hits to turn a network around. The problem isn’t that NBC can’t make a comeback, it’s that they don’t seem to be trying.
eric post, yes one hit can have a big influence on a network, but that year you referenced brought not 1, but 3, big hits to ABC: housewives, lost, and midseason saw Grey’s Anatomy.
holly as always thx
heres the link
i think it gives a little insight on nbc u thinking
http://scifiwire.com/2009/03/sci-fi-president-dave-how.php#comments
thoughts?
oh and something i heard-is there is a new channel called chiller
which is an NBC u channel like scifi that will be a horror kind of channel
does anyone know if this is so
and if it is arent they cutting their own viewership?
sry i was just told chiller is already a channel
did not know that
so arent they cutting their own wrists bymaking another channel?
seems crazy to me to create more competition for themselves
do i have it wrong?
NBC needs to cater to it’s ‘Biggest Loser’ audience. The same audience that loved ‘Friends’ and ‘Sienfeld’. Why not a new generation of ‘Friends” ? Take it to a college campus setting or why not hit the midwest with a Milwalkie or Cleveland themed show centered on a family holding it together in the recession. It worked with ‘Lavergne and Shirley’ and ‘Family Ties’. Where are those talented ‘Cosby’ youngsters? I’d love to see them raising their new brood of children with the grandparents advice and babysitting adventures! Or an even better idea that would cost little money… do a weekly condensed version of ‘Days’, recapping the story from the week before, with a hidden ‘hint’ of the storyline to come in the next week. Daily watchers would follow the recap, and former viewers who no longer have the option of watching during the day would come back to the show for the evening version, and tune in on their days off since they would be up on the current storyline. Tuesday nights would be perfect, perhaps before Jay, and after the kids are in bed. Think about it!
So, how long before Jeff Zucker is fired? NBC had the chance to get big ratings or at least bigger than they got with the recent appearance of George Clooney on ER. But, for some reason, it wasn’t hyped at all.
What any network needs is someone who can spot talent and put it on the air without trying to force every show into a demographic.
To add another approach to NBC and NBC Universals need to get more viewers some non in the box thinking might be in order. If I asked you to name a friend or family member that just uses a call phone and no longer pays for a wire based phone you likely know of several. The same thing is starting with TV viewers. I read everywhere of younger folks ( you know the one networks ratings desire them) that are just watching the few shows they watch online or buy the DVD.
Here comes my idea. NBC Universal operates a bunch of channels in additional to NBC. There are two new ones that do not have a very wide carriage yet on cable. These two networks include Chiller and Sleuth. What NBC needs to do is add these channels to their network over the air broadcast as digital sub channels. They could then do all kinds of promotions like a concept I call PRIME TIME OVERNIGHT where they repeat their entire PRIME TIME offering to folks that may not choose their shows when in competition with stronger shows at the other networks yet would watch if available. The draw I mention is the younger folks that refuse to pay cable for the few shows they watch could in fact watch for free using a digital tv .Local cable providers would likely begin to add the Chiller and Sleuth as a local network pickup thus giving a much wider audience to these upstart channels. The cost would be very small because the networks already exist. To compete with online viewers over the air free digital tv is workable. The additional exposure for the NBC shows could keep a few going long enough to get a following and maybe a new hit or two could emerge.
I suspect Chuck could remain on the air and be shown several times making the Chuck lovers happy. Life would also get a few viewers that watch the other shows now and never see it and might grow a following. And yes all those wonderful original movies that were shown on the channel once known as “ The Science Fiction Channel”. every Saturday and Sunday for the last many years could be repeated on Chiller breading a new group of mindless monster movie fans.
not sure about that
but it doesnt bode well for scifi or nbc
i hope the management changes soon for both channels
Quick…contact the spirit of Brandon Tartikoff…immediately!