For those of you old enough (re: born by at least 1985), you'll remember a time when network television ran original programming 7 days a week. Friday nights had the ever popular comedy block called TGIF on ABC, consisting of shows like "Family Matters", "Perfect Strangers", and "Full House". Saturday nights, on NBC, you found the comedy block consisting of "Golden Girls", "Empty Nest", "Amen", and "Nurses" followed by the hit drama "Sisters".
Cut to 2011, where Friday nights are considered the nights to kill a television show, and Saturday nights are a virtual wasteland of...re-runs of the shows ran during the week. What happened here? How did we lose two nights a week of programming? The two most prevalent reasons:
1. "Well, there's cable now!" you scream. Okay. Outside of reality television, what is it that you're finding on cable that will keep people from watching network television on those nights? I dare you to find something people are dying to watch on Friday and Saturday nights on cable television.
2. "No one's home!" you yell. Um...very much untrue. Sure, a nice chunk of the demographic television caters to are out on the town, but what about those 8-16 year olds who are stuck at home, and those of us in our late 20s-early 30s and older who have done the "Go out all night" routine a decade earlier and more interested in staying in? Or those people in the coveted demographic who are too poor to go out in this awful economy?
Here's the real reason, in my opinion: no one is willing to take risks anymore...even though there is proof that an audience will show up to the party. Since moving "Smallville" and "Supernatural" to Friday nights, The CW has been treated to ratings bumps for both shows, versus being in their previous Thursday night berths. "Fringe", which was being clobbered in the ratings on Thursday nights, recently moved to Friday nights on FOX and their ratings have held steady. "Blue Bloods" was doing just fine on CBS Friday nights, but the network just moved it to Wednesdays to get even better ratings. All of these shows were thought of as "DOA" when their respective networks announced the moves to Friday nights...and not one of them failed. Sadly, network execs will stupidly believe this as more of a fluke than an upward trend for creating content for this night.
So, how would I run a network, if I had the autonomy?
1) Move some of my most popular shows to said Friday and Saturday nights. Audiences are passionate about their shows. They will picket, send in trinkets to the network, and begin petitions if their shows are in danger of being cancelled. So it begs that they will follow this show to whatever night of the week it's moved to. Some of the most popular shows, no matter what nights they've been switched to, continue to thrive. "American Idol" just moved to two nights later in the week and continues to flourish, and is the top rated television show on the air. Will audiences stop watching it if it moved to Friday and Saturday nights? Nope. Ratings may diminish a little, but nothing will kill that show. Do you think everyone who is in love with all the "Mc-fill-in-the-blanks" on Grey's Anatomy will just up and stop watching if it got moved to the weekend? Or people will stay away from C.S.I or Criminal Minds if it was taken out of the weekday mix? Not a chance in hell. Pair these popular shows with either a newbie or another accomplished show and it's "Hello weekend television!" all over again.
2) Develop shows that are dynamic, fun, and can be sustained. Way too often, networks look for the next event show, like "Lost". "Lost" was a flash in the pan, lightning-strikes-only-once kind of event. It was a great show and the writers knew what they were doing to keep it going as long as it did. However, the networks stop thinking about "character" and create more "plot" oriented series that will never last for a whole season, let alone several. Some cases in point: "FlashForward". Great premise...for a movie. Horrible one for a TV series. The entire world blacks out for a couple of minutes and get glimpses of six months into the future...some try to stop horrific things from happening; others can't wait for the wonderful fates they are destined to have. But...then the date happens. Then what? Another blackout to six months later? Then ANOTHER black out...? The audience wasn't having it, and it ended after one season. "The Event", a highly anticipated conspiracy drama on NBC. Something crazy happens. Are aliens involved? Future people? How many years can you get by on not knowing what the "event" is before audience gets bored? And if we learn what the event is early...the surprise is gone, and good luck sustaining a weekly series. Learn from "Twin Peaks" guys. After Laura Palmer's murderer was revealed, the show died a slow death leading to wacky, way-out-there-stories. And let's not go there with "The Cape", which, as of this writing, just got its episode ordered cut, and will likely not be returning next year...
3) Shorter seasons/year round programming. If it works for cable, it can work for network television. Imagine a network, where, every season contains 12 episodes. Three month commitments to television series, with no re-runs or weeks off during the holiday season. (This baffles me. Network execs think no one watches television during the holidays...yet when most people are stuck going home for the holidays, they don't go out and have nothing to do BUT watch television...hello!) No more "one week on, two weeks off...three weeks on, two weeks off" for us! Why stretch five and a half months of programming over the course of nine months??? Which leads to...
4) Giving shows a chance to find its audience. Currently, network execs will pull a show after two airings or, worse, air it for a month, then take it off for three months (I'm looking at you, "V" and "The Event"). This consummately kills any chances for a new series to find an audience...or keep one! Hence the shortening of series and airing them consecutively.
5) Cancel series when they reach a natural end. Yes, I know the name of the game is "ratings". Outside of "Seinfeld" and "Friends" and a few select others, how many shows are really giving you great story eight and nine years in? Before "ER" left the airwaves, people had stopped turning into it in droves several seasons back. There really was no reason for it to last 15 years. "Smallville", despite its ratings increase (mostly because fans knew this would be its last season), has been on for 10 years...and most fans stopped watching at least three years ago. "One Tree Hill" has miraculously lasted eight seasons...and may be back for a ninth (!!!!). I would cap each series with a maximum five year run...and if the stories are still fresh, and audiences are still coming back for more, then I would reconsider a longer run. The main thing is to go out on a high...not end up in the toilet and overstaying ones welcome...while better series struggle and get cancelled sooner (*cough* Friday Night Lights)
6) No reality shows. In my network world, I believe in a show schedule that will have my audiences laughing, crying, and having their thoughts provoked...not their minds turning to Jello. Words like "Housewife", "Shore", or "Real" will not find themselves on my network unless it's scripted. Meaning...a writer-friendly network. (I know I have 24 hours to fill...my daytime shows will be Soap Opera and Talk Show formats...which I do NOT consider reality.)
7) I would start my primetime at 7pm. It's done in the south, and I believe in the midwest...so the West Coast and East Coast need to catch up! Think about it: 10pm is late, for most people, especially ones with families, to watch a television series...especially if their mornings begin at 5 or 6am. On my network, 7pm is the new 8pm, and so on...so that by 10pm, your television watching is over and done with, and you can get that rare 8 hours of sleep.
And that, dear reader, is how I would run MikeTV. I'd live long, prosper, and cater to the one group of people all of the other networks seem to forget is most important: its audience.
