The Sternberg Report

Can Supergirl Soar in a Male Dominated Genre?

The trailer for CBS’s upcoming Supergirl reportedly got more than 10 million views in one week.  This doesn’t really mean anything in terms of whether or not the show will succeed. The traditional press coverage of the high volume of trailer views probably has more impact than the actual online viewing itself.

Over the years, I’ve demonstrated many times that pre-season buzz has no correlation with new series success – this is particularly true for sci-fi/superhero shows, which always get the most online and comic con buzz from fanboys (and girls).  One reason for this is that the pre-season online chatter comes from people who haven't even seen the pilot, so are essentially commenting on the stars attached to the show, or the genre.

Soon after the trailer came out, the pilot was leaked online.  Given that the series was getting a significant amount negative speculation, it wouldn’t surprise me if it was leaked “on purpose.”  Regardless, the pilot was very good, so the fact that it was leaked can only help the series.  It already seems to have turned much of the pre-season noise positive.  When a lot of people can say, "I've seen the pilot and I loved it, check out this link," that's a whole different type of pre-season buzz.

There are several additional factors to consider when projecting its success potential.

Other heroes who occupy the same DC Universe, The Flash and Arrow, are both successful on CW.  But CW’s barometer of success is lower than CBS’s.  Had either aired on CBS, and averaged the same rating (under 1.5 among adults 18-49) they might have been canceled after just a few episodes.

ABC’s Marvel Agents of Shield gets a slightly higher rating, but if not for its tie-in to The Avengers movie franchise, and Disney (ABC) owning Marvel, it would probably not have been renewed.  FOX’s Gotham is the only one to generate higher than a 2 rating among adults 18-49 (and 25-54).

The Flash and Arrow both have median ages under 45, while Agents of Shield and Gotham have median ages of 48 and 49, respectively.  So obviously, CBS, who’s average median age is 59, is hoping for the same. Supergirl’s median age should be slightly lower than Gotham – both have a mythology most familiar to Baby Boomers, but Supergirl is more kid and teen friendly.

It will also be interesting to see if men and boys will watch a superhero show where virtually all the main characters are women (including the main villain).

Supergirl is trying to be a combination of the breeziness, humor, and tone of The Flash and the more serious “let’s protect the world from enhanced powered people and aliens” tone of Agents of Shield.  Whether it can be maintained on a weekly basis remains to be seen.  It can if it doesn’t fall into the same trap as the Superman movies – namely the only real threats to her are others from Krypton or someone with kryptonite.  That will get boring fast.  The interactions among the regular ensemble cast will be just as important to the show’s success as the action and special effects.

It seems primed for crossovers with The Flash (less so for Arrow), and with continual references to her super powered cousin in Metropolis, an occasional sweeps appearance would certainly help.  With DC’s upcoming Batman vs. Superman movie, and plans for a Justice League of America franchise, there seems to be ample opportunity for Supergirl to be part of that universe.

In a real head-scratching move, CBS will schedule Supergirl at 8pm on Monday, opposite Gotham, which will have a month and a half to re-establish its audience base before Supergirl debuts in November.  This will not only limit its audience, but will further hurt it by limiting its live audience.  There’s nothing worse than a low-rated series with high DVR (i.e., low commercial) viewing.  Here’s hoping CBS decides to move the series to a more appropriate time period – otherwise it might not get off the ground.

With a better time period and proper promotion on similar programming, Supergirl could soar and be the under-50 hit CBS is looking for. It is primed to appeal to Baby Boomers and their kids (and grand kids).

Why Most New Broadcast Network Shows Will Flop

CBS’s Madam Secretary is one of my wife and my favorite shows.  The last episode we watched had a promo for a new TNT show, Proof, premiering in June.  It looks interesting, and we are probably going to at least check out the first episode to see if it’s worthy of being placed in one of our DVR queues.

Some of my favorite original scripted series are on TNT. But other than for those and sports I don’t watch the network much. So I wouldn’t have known the June start date of one of my favorites, The Last Ship, if I hadn’t seen it promoted on ABC’s Marvel Agents of Shield, CBS's NCIS: New Orleans, and NBC's The Blacklist.

Over the past few years, I've watched several cable series that I never would have known about had I not seen them promoted on other networks.

Cable networks long ago came to understand that the best way to grow their audience was to appeal to those who were watching similar shows on other networks.  They also understood that it didn't really hurt them much if other cable networks did the same.  If everyone gained viewers, more advertising dollars would shift from broadcast to cable, and everyone would eventually benefit. Yet the broadcast networks still stubbornly refuse to see that the reverse is also true.

The broadcast networks still don't seem to understand that they are no longer enemies.  They are, in fact, or should be, allies.  The press has headlines screaming about the broadcast networks losing viewers (not ABC or CBS losing viewers).  Everyone except the broadcast networks themselves see them as a single entity.  My wife and I DVR most of what we watch, and she doesn't even know what network (or time) the show is on.  The broadcast networks will, strangely enough, take advertising from their real competitors – ad-supported cable networks, HBO, Showtime, and even Netflix, but not from one another. 

It is not the 1980s or 1990s anymore. The broadcast network rating races are so close, that potentially good shows are often canceled after just a few episodes because viewers haven't heard about them yet.  Shows like Cheers, which was the lowest rated show of the week when it debuted, ended its 11 season run in the top 5.  Seinfeld took three seasons to become a success.  These and many other TV classics might not have lasted more than a month if they premiered today.

A broadcast hit on one network actually benefits all networks.  When an Empire takes off, people start believing in the power of network TV again.  Except for the very occasional cable phenomenon like The Walking Dead, no other platform is currently capable of generating the audience size of a successful broadcast network show. Even AMC's just ended Mad Men, while generating tons of press and buzz, was very low rated by broadcast network standards.

Looking over the primetime schedules just announced at the broadcast upfronts, there are numerous candidates for cross-promotion. Some obvious examples – new medical dramas, Heartbreaker (NBC), and Code Black (CBS) should be promoted on Grey’s Anatomy (ABC), the new FBI drama, Quantico (ABC) should be promoted on Criminal Minds (CBS) and The Blacklist (NBC).

Why in the world wouldn’t all five broadcast networks cross-promote new series, Supergirl, Heroes Reborn, and DC’s Legends of Tomorrow and returning shows, Marvel's Agents of Shield, Gotham, Flash, and Arrow? They are all trying to reach basically the same audience.  Supergirl, Flash, and Arrow take place in the same DC universe and will probably (eventually) have an epic crossover (so why not some cross promotion?).  The networks can and will have heavy online presences leading up to these new series premieres, but that is dwarfed in both size and impact to promoting them on air in shows that appeal to the same audience.

The last time I raised the issue of the broadcast networks' refusal to promote one another's series, an anonymous network source was actually quoted as saying it's not going to happen because "it's an ego thing."  He couldn't come up with a single valid reason not to do it. 

Putting ego aside for a moment, the broadcast networks should realize that every time they do cross-promote their products, ratings soar.  Just look at NFL Football ratings over the past few years, or the NCAA Men's College Basketball Tournament.

In what other instance does a company refuse to advertise its product to the largest and most easily accessible and measurable audience?

Let's be clear.  These aren't just random consumers the broadcast networks are choosing not to pursue.  These are the best possible prospects, who the networks know are already watching similar programming, and are at that moment at their most receptive toward receiving a message about programming.

They are viewers who are already watching and engaged with the exact type of program the networks are trying to promote to them.  I don't know how to say it more clearly.

There is absolutely no question in my mind that if the networks started cross-promoting one another's shows, new series success rates would rise dramatically, and overall broadcast ratings would stabilize (or at least decline less). 

It is interesting to note that at the upfront schedule presentations, the networks still relish talking about how they are #1 at this or that, but seldom show any actual ratings anymore.  If they continue to not advertise to their largest chunk of available and engaged viewers, two or three years from now a broadcast network will be bragging about being number one with 1.0 adults 18-49 primetime rating (if they are still talking about demos – which is another topic for another time).

Top 10 TV Audience and Research Myths and Misconceptions

In honor of David Letterman’s final month, here is my own top 10 list from the home office in Hoboken, New Jersey.

 
#10.    Millennials spend more time streaming than watching traditional TV.

 This makes for a good headline, but has no basis in reality.

 Millennials actually spend more than seven times as many hours per week watching traditional TV than watching video on the internet, multimedia devices, and smartphones combined (compared to 12 times as much for Adults 25-54).  As a group, they also DVR and fast-forward through commercials at a lower rate than older viewers.

 #9.    C3 ratings account for DVR fast-forwarding through commercials.

 Sorry.  Not true. 

 C3 ratings for most networks are higher than the live program rating.  Let’s think about this for a second.  Half the country doesn’t even have a DVR, yet we are seeing higher ratings for three days of just commercial minute viewing than for live viewing of the actual programs. This is so ridiculous on its face, that the industry should be crying out WTF!

Let's not forget that C3 was initially designed as a one or two year measure until industry post-buy systems were able to handle minute-by-minute ratings.  Nielsen did very little research into how C3 ratings should be calculated.

 #8.    Median Age can tell you which networks attract more young viewers. 

 Audience skew has nothing to do with audience size.

 Half the top-30 rated general entertainment cable networks among Adults 18-49 have median ages over 45.  Their average Adults 18-49 rating is about the same as those with median ages under 45.

 If you combined the Adult 18-49 impressions to all of the general entertainment cable networks with median ages between 35 and 45, they would add up to about the same as CBS’s Adult 18-49 audience (CBS’s average median age is approaching 60).

 
#7.    Online surveys.

 I know, let’s ask people who will take the time to answer an online survey, better yet, those who spend enough time online that they want to be in an online panel, how much time they spend online.  And then let’s assume they represent the country at large. 

 Because these types of surveys are so quick and relatively inexpensive, too many companies think that anyone can write the survey questions and analyze the results.  These surveys are only valuable if you have the right people asking the right questions.

 #6.    Pre-season buzz matters for new TV series.

 There are several reasons why pre-season buzz has virtually no impact on whether or not a program becomes successful.

 Despite the fact that much of their audience is older, the traditional press has always tended to focus on the younger and sexier programs.  It’s always fascinating to see what shows newspapers and syndicated entertainment magazines focus on, almost oblivious as to whom their own viewers or readers are.   CBS, often with the most successful new series, has traditionally received less pre-season buzz than other networks.

 Comic-con buzz is often heavily skewed toward sci-fi or super hero series, or shows with former sci-fi stars attached, and seldom have any affect on a show’s success potential.

 People who are chatting about new shows on social media before they premiere generally have not seen the pilot, and are not necessarily going to be watching the shows (even if the chat is positive) – particularly if the new show is scheduled opposite one of their favorites.  That’s different from people chatting about a show that’s already on the air that they have been watching.  That actually can provide an indication of whether a show is poised to grow or decline.

Over the past 15 years, roughly 30% of the series with the most pre-season buzz became successful – slightly lower than the average new series success rate during the same period.

#5.    Day-after recall studies.

In the 1960s and 1970s, when there were only three networks and a few independent stations, studies where you ask people if they remember seeing a given commercial in a given program might have had some value.  Not today.

Unless you know that the commercial in question is new and only aired in certain programs yesterday, there are simply too many viewing options to have any idea where viewers might have actually seen the ads. 

Several  years ago, the Cabletelevision Advertising Bureau (CAB) conducted the best recall study I've seen.  They called people while they were watching TV, asked what they were watching, asked what the last commercial was that they recalled, and then independently verified that those commercials actually ran in those programs. 

When I was at ION, I conducted a similar study through our Vision Critical panel, to compare ad recall among live and DVR viewers.  There is really no other way to get at this type of intelligence other than through near-immediate recall.  Day-after recall is an anachronism when it comes to commercials (though it still works quite well for program engagement).

#4.     Two words. Big Data.

#3.     Higher ratings lead to more ad revenue.

This is actually not the case.  Both broadcast and cable networks care much more about their ranking compared to their perceived competition than whether or not their ratings go up.

If you were to ask any broadcast network whether they would rather lose 5% of their audience next season but move into first place (because everyone else declined more) or gain 5% but slip into third or fourth place, they would all rather be in first place.  Otherwise, you'd see them advertising their programming on one another the way cable networks do so effectively.

Likewise, if you asked every cable network that currently ranks outside the top 10 among adults 18-49 and 25-54 if they would rather gain viewers and stay where they currently rank or lose viewers but move into the top 10, they would all choose the latter. This, despite the fact that generally less than half a rating point separate 20 or so cable networks.

Until the marketplace dynamics and industry perceptions that continue to make audience rankings more profitable than audience size change, we'll be analyzing rankings of continually declining audience bases.

#2.    Broadcast Networks Need to Follow the Cable Model.

If they want lower ratings, that's the way to go.  Only a handful of original scripted cable series are managing even a 1.0 rating among adults 18-49.  Even the lowest rated primetime broadcast series get more viewers than that.

#1.     Social media drives TV viewing.

I have not seen any credible research to indicate this is the case.  I would not take on face value any studies done by social media companies or Nielsen in partnership with social media companies.  TV viewing drives social media comments about those programs, but there is not yet any evidence that the reverse is true.  The average person spends about 8 minutes per day on Twitter (and 30 minutes per day on Facebook).  

Will All TV Median Ages Soon Be Over 50?

Back in August, 1991, when I first introduced the concept of using Nielsen data to calculate median ages for television networks, in a report titled, Median Age: A Measure of Program Selectivity, it was a vastly different media world than it is today.  There were only four broadcast networks, half as many cable networks as today, no video streaming, and the average home could only receive 33 channels.  It took a few years, particularly as new networks started emerging, for median age to start taking hold as an industry-wide measurement.

The simplicity of using a single number to help analyze the increasingly fragmenting media landscape had a strong appeal – particularly to networks like FOX, WB, and UPN, which were trying to distinguish themselves from the more established broadcast networks.  My friend and colleague Jack Wakshlag started using median age for WB during their industry presentations, and other networks and programmers soon followed suit.  It took several more years before Nielsen finally agreed to report it as a standard metric.

In my initial 1991 report, FOX’s median age was only 29, ABC’s was 37, NBC’s was 42, and CBS was the oldest at 45.  There were only a dozen or so primetime series with median ages above 50, all of them on CBS.

Ten years later, in 2000, there was still a relatively wide gap among the then six broadcast networks.  WB’s median age was under 30, UPN and FOX were in the mid-30s, ABC and NBC were in the low 40s, and CBS was in the low 50s. 

Another 10 years went by, and as younger viewers started to shift to other viewing sources, the broadcast networks aged considerably (while the gap between them narrowed).  In 2010, for the first time, ABC, CBS, and NBC all had median ages of 50 or higher, with CBS topping out at 55. FOX had aged up to 45.  Of the English language broadcast networks, only CW had an average median age under 40 (Univision was also under 40, as were all the other Spanish language networks).

In 2015, broadcast median ages continue to rise, with CBS at 59, ABC and NBC at 54, FOX at 49, and CW at 44.  Roughly 45% of all ad-supported cable networks measured by Nielsen have median ages of 50 or higher. Five years ago, only about one-third of reported cable networks had an average primetime median age of 50 or higher.

Originally, median age was seen as basically a simpler replacement for looking at percent composition for numerous demographic segments.  While median age had real value 20 years ago in evaluating one network versus another, is that still true today?  

If your target audience is Adults 18-49, does it matter that TruTV’s average median age is 38 and TNT’s is 50?  In a vacuum, maybe.  But when you know TNT gets more than twice as many Adults 18-49, the answer is obviously no. 

Does it matter that AMC’s average median age is 42, when Walking Dead is 37, Better Call Saul is 42, Mad Men is 52, and Turn is 55?  Or that FX’s average median age is 41, when American Horror Story and Louie are 37, Mike & Molly is 50, and Justified and The Americans are 55?

If you look at the top 20 rated cable networks among Adults 18-49, two (Adult Swim and Nick-At-Nite) have primetime median ages in the 20s, two (ABC Family and Comedy Central) have median ages in the 30s, , and four (TNT, History, HGTV, and ION) have median ages in the 50s.  The rest are in the 40s.

I recently worked at ION, and one of our ongoing frustrations was that too many in the industry looked at median age as though it meant something way beyond what it actually means.  It was clear that if we could only get our average median age under 50, the industry would look at us differently.  Should it really matter, for example, that ION’s Criminal Minds has a median age of 53, compared to Nick-at-Nite’s Friends at 35 and USA’s Modern Family at 41?  Even if all three have pretty much the same Adult 18-49 ratings and Criminal Minds has a significantly higher Adults 25-54 rating?  Of course it shouldn’t matter.  Unfortunately, in our business perception often trumps reality.  And 50 is still a magic number.