Quote:

---

“Fox, which saw it’s own David E Kelly drama, “Girl’s Club,” tank after two episodes is turning to it’s bread and butter—staged reality series—to drum up interest. And no doubt the second installment of “American Idol” and the debut of Joe Millionaire” will create noise—enough noise, Fox hopes to drown out the fact that “Firefly” has been canceled, while neither “Fastlane” nor “John Doe”, two new dramas still going are not likely to get the network closer to Emmy award or Nielsen glory.”

---

Quote:

---

“ It isn’t hard to feel all of the networks’ pain. The challenge of launching a new drama or comedy has only gotten tougher and cable TV continues to be a flea in the ear of ratings domination”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LeftHand:I still say that if you poll five thousand people, the only thing you've conclusively done is found out the opinions of 5000 people) or networks get use to smaller ratings, niche (whatever that means) programming cannot survive on the Big Three + 1 Pretender.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BrownCoat1:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LeftHand:I still say that if you poll five thousand people, the only thing you've conclusively done is found out the opinions of 5000 people) or networks get use to smaller ratings, niche (whatever that means) programming cannot survive on the Big Three + 1 Pretender.

---

I fully agree. Whoever came up w/ the bright idea that polling a very small percentage of TV viewers and allowing them to have so much influence on whether a show makes or breaks is ridiculous. The ratings system is broken and needs to be revamped.

How do they choose these people? Are they considered average John Q Public plus spouse and 2.3 kids or are they just drawn at random. Do the people they choose even fit the demographic for the audience that would tune in to the show they are polling? Obviously an average person may like a Sci Fi based show, but they may hate Sci Fi as well. Suppose a family that does not particularly care for Sci Fi is picked to do the ratings. Isn't their vote biased?

I have never cared much for Fox and their programming. The only thing I can rely on w/ Fox is that if they air a Sci Fi program and I like it, they will cancel it in short order.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
For exactly
the same reason why people would slow down to watch an accident being cleared up on the side of the road - eventhough they know damn well that they hate waiting in traffic for absolutely no reason but people ahead of them looking (they know this, because they themselves just got done bitching about it) - people like to watch the kind of crap that TV Execs put on TV.

Those Bastards!

---

Quote:

---

I fully agree. Whoever came up w/ the bright idea that polling a very small percentage of TV viewers and allowing them to have so much influence on whether a show makes or breaks is ridiculous.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Girlie:
Anyway there are so many flaws with this system, so many cheats to get around it it isn't even funny. The whole thing was supposed to involve randomly chosen viewers but even that can be gotten around...and is. Anyway the point is the only real test of viewership is to actuall monitor all viewers and i'm not sure we want that kind of system either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Girlie:

Quote:

---

I fully agree. Whoever came up w/ the bright idea that polling a very small percentage of TV viewers and allowing them to have so much influence on whether a show makes or breaks is ridiculous.

---

Several years ago I worked for Market Research for one of the big three ( one with an N) We met a standard criteria. A group or groups were assembled to view a new or troubled show. The group was 22-25 people. Usual standards were 50/50 male female. 2/3 18-34 year olds 1/3 34-49 and (2) 50-52 No older. The race ratio was supposed to represent the viewing public as a whole. Therefore, there were 20 caucasian, 3 African American, and 2 Hispanic and/or Asian. When chosen these people were asked "blind questions" about thier viewing habits to be sure they watched the type of program being shown. The group was then shown the program and participated in a discussion. You really can't believe how stupid people are until you've been in one of these groups.Then they get paid and go home. Anyway there are so many flaws with this system, so many cheats to get around it it isn't even funny. The whole thing was supposed to involve randomly chosen viewers but even that can be gotten around...and is. Anyway the point is the only real test of viewership is to actuall monitor all viewers and i'm not sure we want that kind of system either. In the long run there are many reasons why "Firefly" didn't succeed and I believe any change in their combonation and we may have been Ok.

I just don't understand how networks can look at their dwindling numbers ans failed programing and still see it as the viewers failure. Deny deny deny.

If you can't say something nice....Go visit the Joe Millionaire board.

---