The Sternberg Report

In the Era of Peak TV+ can Nielsen (or anyone) Measure TV Viewing?

In 2020, the era of Peak TV+ gets underway in earnest.  By mid-year, there will be no less than seven major streaming services (and several smaller ones) producing original scripted series and spending upward of $40 billion per year on video content. 

More than two-thirds of TV homes already subscribe to at least one streaming service, with the average subscriber getting three.  By the end of 2020, the average SVOD household will get four streaming services, with more than three-quarters of TV homes subscribing to at least one.  Millions will be getting Disney+ and Apple TV+ free for a year through various promotional deals, while millions more will get Peacock and HBO Max for free, depending on what cable system or premium services they currently subscribe to.  There will also be numerous bundles and combinations of services available to various groups of customers.  It probably won’t be until the end of 2021 when we start to get a handle on how many paid subscribers each new streaming service has, and for how many streaming services the average subscriber is willing to pay.  We will also know by then approximately how many subscribers current streaming services lose to the newbies.

How in the world can we measure what people will actually be watching?

• Unless they are representative of the total U.S. population based on subscriptions to individual streaming services, and combinations of streaming services, Nielsen samples can’t accurately measure TV viewing anymore.

The whole purpose of a TV sample is to be representative of the total U.S., with the idea that you and your demographic cohorts have similar viewing habits.  Your cohorts are determined based on characteristics that Nielsen has determined impact viewing behavior – such as age, sex, race/ethnicity, presence of children, income, education, language spoken at home, etc.  Also important is whether or not you have cable/satellite/telco (i.e., pay TV services) or DVRs.

In the past, broad platform mattered more than individual platform.  In other words, whether or not you have cable does not require the sample being representative of every cable system, because that does not significantly affect viewing choices or behavior.  Nor is it important to know what type of DVR you have, since that will not substantially impact your viewing behavior and how much you fast-forward through commercials. 

Whether or not you subscribe to streaming services, however, is not the same.  If you only have Netflix, available programming, and your actual viewing habits, will be dramatically different than if you only subscribe to CBS All Access.  Likewise, if you bundle Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN+, and add HBO Max, your viewing habits will be different than if you have Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Peacock, and Apple TV+.  The only way to have a meaningful television sample, is to accurately represent the total U.S. based on every possible combination of streaming service and cable/satellite/telco subscriptions.  This means that the make-up of Nielsen’s national and local samples could need to change dramatically every year.  The days when all Nielsen needed to worry about was cable and DVR penetration are gone forever.

• Even if the sample is representative of the total U.S., it may not be enough. With hundreds of channels, DVRs, on-demand, and multiple streaming services, I and my demographic and psychographic cohorts no longer necessarily watch the same things even if we have access to the same programming.  And we certainly don’t watch at the same time.  According to Nielsen data, live viewing to traditional television among Adults 18-34 is down by a startling 40% from five years ago.  Because of the sharp increases in streaming and watching video on smartphones and tablets, however, their total video viewing is only down by 4%.  But it’s more splintered than ever.  Even older viewers, those 50-64 and 65+ have shown dramatic increases in streaming and watching video on smartphones (the Baby Boomer TV Generation is nothing like their parents were at the same age).  How can anything but samples approaching a full census still determine who represents the total population of TV viewers?

• In 2007 and 2008, I was involved with the Council for Research Excellence’s landmark Video Consumer Mapping Study as co-Chair of its Media Consumption and Engagement Committee. One of the study’s lesser-known findings was that Nielsen’s overall usage levels of households and broad demographic segments, such as total viewers and adults 18-49 were remarkably similar to the observed viewing behavior in our sample.  Once you started to look at narrower age groups, however, the reported Nielsen data started to stray significantly from the observed viewing data.  And this was just overall TV usage levels, not individual program ratings (and was 12 years ago, before video viewing was nearly as splintered as it is today).  DVR penetration was barely 20% of the U.S., and there were no streaming services.  At the time, I suggested we replicate the study every five years, but of course that never happened.

• Cord cutting will make measuring TV viewing even more complicated. While not yet a major factor, with the proliferation of streaming services, combined with the increasing costs of subscribing to pay TV services, the number of cord cutters will almost certainly continue to rise over the next few years.  By 2025, more than one-quarter of TV homes will likely have cut the cord.

• Binge viewing is not just a Netflix, Amazon, or Hulu phenomenon, it impacts linear ad-supported TV as well. I currently have seven network and four premium cable series queued up on my DVR.  Six of them have been there more than three days, and four of them have three or more episodes stored.  My wife and I have different schedules, so shows I watch by myself tend to get viewed quickly, while those we watch together build up multiple episodes before we get around to watching them.  I also tend to record new fall series I’m interested in, but don’t start watching them until I know they’ve been picked up for the full season.  At least half of my ad-supported TV viewing would not be picked up by Nielsen’s C3 or C7 ratings (even C35 might not capture it all).  Is it possible that network viewership is not actually declining as much as we think, but simply shifting beyond our current currency measurement?  Or is my household just an anomaly?

• At one time, so-called single-source measurement was considered the ideal for television audience research. It now might be preferable to have separate samples for linear/time-shifted viewing on a television set, streaming services on any platform, viewing on desktops/laptops/tablets/smartphones, and out-of-home viewing.  Each of these samples would be easier to construct and maintain, and ensure they are nationally representative.  A single sample can no longer be expected to represent the total population’s video viewing habits.  I’m not sure we should even rely on a single company to do so.

 

It is actually easy to figure out how accurate current TV measurement is, and to determine what needs to be done to fix it.  When I was on The Council for Research Excellence, I proposed a methodology for gauging how accurate Nielsen was at measuring an increasingly splintered video viewing environment.  Nielsen, of course, didn’t want to have anything to do with it. 

Here’s all you need to do. 

• Develop a sample of 100 of the top researchers in the industry (buyers, sellers, advertisers), who are adept at detailed work and understand how audience measurement works. Nielsen would meter their TVs, smartphones, and all other video viewing capable devices they own.

• Set up 20 or 30 different viewing scenarios for what and how they will view video content and commercials during a single day.

• Participants would then log in their video and advertising viewing (down to the second).

• Compare their reported viewing to what the measurement services show.

This will tell us what the industry needs to do next.  It would be a good idea to have Nielsen, ComScore, and a few other audience measurement companies involved.  I’d be more than happy to be involved in the project.

Here's Why Most New Shows Will Flop

These are the best of times for TV viewers, but it might be the worst of times for broadcast TV.

 

The mortality rate of new broadcast series is higher than ever.  Out of 68 new primetime scripted series premiering in the 2016/17 and 2017/18 seasons, only 11 (16%) will still be on the air in fall 2019.  Here are some thoughts on the whys and wherefores.

 

The new TV season is not as relevant as it used to be.  Prior to the early 2000s, the new fall TV season was one of the few entertainment topics discussed throughout the summer on syndicated TV shows such as Entertainment Tonight, Extra, and Access Hollywood, and print magazines such as People, Us, and Entertainment Weekly.  The broadcast networks aired mostly repeats, cable networks contained mostly off-network reruns and reality, and except for the occasional movie blockbuster or celebrity scandal, there wasn’t much else to focus on.  But that was before original scripted series started proliferating on various cable networks during the summer months, and before more than half the country subscribed to at least one streaming service.  The new broadcast season simply doesn’t get as much press as it used to.  There are new scripted series available to viewers year-round.

 

 

Summer and fall programming appeal to different audiences.  My wife and I watch a significant amount of broadcast television during the fall and winter, but very little in the summer.  For us, summer is the time to find new streaming shows to binge.  This is becoming the case for more and more people across the country, particularly younger viewers.  Promos for new dramas such as Emergence (ABC), Evil (CBS), Bluff City Law (NBC), and Prodigal Son (FOX) are not maximizing their potential target audience in Bachelor in Paradise (ABC), Love Island (CBS), Bring the Funny (NBC), and Spin the Wheel (FOX).  The networks need more creative ways, beyond on-air promos to create awareness and intent to view.

 

Live TV viewing is declining, particularly for primetime entertainment series.  DVR ownership continues to inch upward (and is now over 55% of TV homes).  My wife and I were recently at the movies, and when the ads came on, she commented that she hadn’t seen any of them before.  I had seen one or two that had aired repeatedly on various sports programming.  Most of our viewing to primetime shows is on a delayed basis via DVR, and we tend to fast-forward through most of the commercials – as do many of the folks across the country who own DVRs.  The exceptions are generally sports, award shows, and off-network series, such as The Big Bang Theory on TBS and Criminal Minds on ION, which we watch live.  Ten years ago, she (and many regular TV viewers) could have named most of the new series set to debut over the next week or two and would have been looking forward to checking them out.  Now, she’s only heard of two or three – and only those because we’ve been watching football for the past three weeks.

 

Broadcast networks still won’t cross-promote.  Cable networks long ago realized 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 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 – which is exactly what happened.  The broadcast networks still stubbornly refuse to promote one another’s new shows, while accepting ads from their real competitors – namely cable networks and streaming services.  The idea that a new show produced by CBS can’t be promoted on CBS because it airs on ABC, is, to say the least, ludicrous.

 

Viewers don’t think in terms of ABC vs. CBS vs. NBC vs. FOX anymore.  Only network executives still think that way.  They don’t seem to understand that in today’s video landscape, ad-supported television should be allied against everything else.

 

This past Sunday’s Emmy telecast was symbolic of just how out of touch the broadcast networks seem to be.  The show trotted out numerous broadcast TV stars to present awards to series, actors, writers, and directors of non-broadcast TV.  No broadcast show won a single award in any comedy, drama, movie, or limited series category (a first?).  Yet during the telecast, which aired on FOX, there were several ads for Netflix and Amazon Prime Video series, ads for the upcoming Disney + and Apple + streaming services, and ads for FX cable – but no ads for any broadcast network other than FOX.  And this, one day before the start of the new broadcast season.  This is simply  mind boggling!

 

Networks stop promoting too soon.  While the broadcast networks heavily promote their new shows over the summer and during premiere week, they tend to cut back on these efforts way too soon.  It usually takes three to five weeks for a new show to settle into its final ratings range.  And in the era of Peak TV, it takes viewers longer than ever to even become aware of a new show much less start watching it.  I’m still discovering shows to watch on Netflix and Amazon Prime Video that have been on for several seasons.  While the networks rely on ad revenue, so don’t have that kind of time, they should be promoting new shows they believe in throughout the fourth quarter and heavily promote that recent episodes are available to stream on demand.  

 

Viewers are becoming used to edgier shows.  The broadcast networks are much more limited by content restraints than other viewing sources.  Premium cable series, such as Westworld, Game of Thrones, and The Deuce, as well as subscription streaming services, enjoy the leeway when it comes to sex and violence that you simply cannot have on ad-supported TV.  And even ad-supported cable series have much more creative freedom than broadcast series.  While this does actually contribute to developing more broad-based hits than edgier and more niche venues, it also results in more failure.  The threshold for success is significantly higher for broadcast than for cable – many cable hits would be canceled after a single episode if they drew the same number of viewers on a broadcast network.

 

Broadcast networks still reach more viewers.  Despite all of the above points, the broadcast networks still have most viewed series on television (The Walking Dead notwithstanding).  Virtually all of the top 50 rated primetime series are on ABC, CBS. NBC, or FOX.  They still reach the broadest audience.  And it is a promising sign that five of the seven highest rated scripted broadcast series debuted over the past three seasons.  But there are only five broadcast networks (if you add in CW).  Numerous other viewing sources and screens continue to slice into and splinter the total viewing pie.  There’s no law that says the broadcast networks’ audience must erode every season.  But they need to stop acting as if it’s still 1989 and basic cable is the only thing they need to worry about.  They should understand that ad-supported broadcast networks, in fact all ad-supported television networks are allies, not adversaries, and start acting accordingly.  Of course, with all of them getting involved in the streaming wars, this seems less likely than ever.

 

The broadcast networks need to keep in mind that many long-running and iconic series over the years needed time, and sometimes a new time period to succeed.  This is truer than ever, yet much more unlikely today.  Long gone are the days when a Cheers can debut as the lowest rated show on television and end its 11-year run as a consistent top-1o series.  Or a Seinfeld can sustain low ratings for three seasons before taking off.  Or an Everybody Loves Raymond can start out on Friday night with low ratings, move to Monday, and become a hit.  We will always have shows such as This is Us, FBI, and The Good Doctor, which immediately click with viewers.  But those are few and far between.  If the broadcast networks are to significantly lower the mortality rate of new series, they need to give shows they like more time to find an audience and promote them more effectively.

Does Pre-Season Buzz Really Matter?

The broadcast networks traditionally unveil their fall schedules in May and promote them to potential viewers throughout the summer.

 

Ad-supported cable networks tend to debut much of their new original scripted series between June and August (when the broadcast networks air mostly repeats, reality, and game shows), although some new shows do premiere in the fall and winter as well.

 

Streaming services, such as Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime Video, and CBS All Access, don’t adhere to traditional concepts of seasons, and drop new series whenever they are ready to go, or simply when they think it is the best time to do so.

 

Some TV shows generate a considerable amount of buzz before they premiere, while others fly under the radar.  This raises some obvious questions. 

 

• How much does pre-season buzz affect a new show’s success potential?
• Does it matter more for certain types of shows than for others?
• Does it matter more for broadcast or cable series?
• Does it matter more for one network versus another?
• How have the sources, level, and impact of buzz changed over the years?

 

Sources of Pre-Season Buzz

Up until the mid-2000s, the broadcast networks aired almost exclusively repeats during the summer and there was virtually no television-based news than previewing new fall series.  This provided ample time to create buzz.  That was before cable networks aired numerous original scripted series during those months, the broadcast networks started airing reality, game shows, and limited run series, and streaming services began to grow.  Viewers’ attention now turns to new broadcast series later and later each season.

 

Syndicated news magazine series such as Entertainment Tonight, Extra, and Access Hollywood, along with newspapers and magazines such as People and Entertainment Weekly, used to be the main sources of new series promotion and buzz. 

 

I was among the pundits appearing on Entertainment Tonight every year discussing my agency’s projected new season hits (when I was head of TV Research at Bozell, TN Media, and Magna Global).  My reports, as well as others from my agency peers would also be quoted in the consumer and trade printed and online press (New York Times, USA Today, TV Guide, Ad Age, Broadcasting & Cable, MediaPost, etc.). 

 

Over the past decade, social media has become a key component in promoting new series as well.  In 2009, Glee became the first network series to become successful because of online promotion.  It debuted to relatively low ratings following that year’s American Idol finale in May.  But virtually non-stop promotion, online music videos and behind-the-scenes clips, generated a tremendous amount of buzz, turning the show into a hit when it premiered the following fall.   

 

            The Comic Con Effect

Studios send reps to the big pop-culture Comic Con event in San Diego every July, where series stars and producers join panels geared to generating pre-season buzz among hardcore fans, which the network publicity machines try to make sure will spill over to the general public.  Anything related to superheroes or sci-fi generates a significant amount of buzz.

 

Stars of returning and new series also show up at the various smaller comic cons across the country throughout the year (although more stars from cable than broadcast series attend those).  The New York Comic Con takes place in October, and now rivals the San Diego event in both size and the number of all-star panels.

 

Here’s a look at the major TV show related panels and presentations at this year’s San Diego Comic Con and those planned for the upcoming New York Comic Con.  While the production studios typically host these events, I’m listing them based on the network or streaming service that airs them.  Following the New York Comic Con in the first week of October, I will be issuing a more in-depth report on these and other pop-culture conventions that take place across the country every year.  Several of them draw more than 100,000 attendees annually.

 

San Diego Comic Con 2019 TV Panels

ABC	Emergence (new), Stumptown (new), Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., The Rookie
CBS	Evil (new)
CW	Batwoman (new), Nancy Drew (new), Legacies, Arrow, Supergirl, Black Lightning, The Flash, Supernatural, Riverdale
FOX	Prodigal Son (new), Bless the Harts (new), NeXt (new), Bob’s Burgers, What Just Happened?, The Simpsons, Family Guy, The Orville
NBC	Superstore, The Good Place, Brooklyn Nine Nine
Adult Swim	Robot Chicken, Rick and Morty, Primal (new)
AMC	The Walking Dead, Fear the Walking Dead, The Terror: Infamy, Preacher, NOS4A2
Cartoon	Transformers: Cyberverse, Teen Titans GO, DC Super Hero Girls, Infinity Train (new)
Comedy Central	Crank Yankers
Disney Channel	Ducktales
FX	What We Do In the Shadows, Mayans M.C.
FXX	Archer
History	Project Blue Book
Nickelodeon	SpongeBob SquarePants (20th anniversary)
SYFY	Van Helsing, Wynonna Earp, The Magicians
TBS	American Dad, Snowpiercer (new)
Travel	Ghost Adventures Live!
Epix	Pennyworth (new)
HBO	Game of Thrones, Westworld, His Dark Materials (new)
Starz	The Rook
Amazon Prime	Undone (new), The Boys (new), Carnival Row (new), The Expanse, The Man in the High Castle
CBS All Access	Star Trek Discovery, Star Trek: Picard (new), Star Trek: Lower Decks (new)
DC Universe	Harley Quinn (new), Titans, Doom Patrol, Young Justice: Outsiders
Hulu	Veronica Mars, Solar Opposites (new)
Netflix	The Order, Cursed (new), The Witcher (new), The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance (new)
Shudder	Creepshow
YouTube	Cobra Kai, Impulse

 

 

New York Comic Con 2019 TV Panels (scheduled as of this writing)

ABC	Emergence (new)
CBS	Evil (new)
CW	Charmed, Riverdale, Roswell, New Mexico, Black Lightning, Legacies, Nancy Drew (new), Katy Keene (new)
FOX	Prodigal Son (new), NeXt (new)
NBC	Manifest, Lincoln (new)
Adult Swim	Robot Chicken, One Punch Man, Primal (new)
AMC	The Walking Dead, Untitled third Walking Dead series (new)
Disney Channel	The Owl House (new)
FX	DEVS
FXX	Archer
Nickelodeon	Spongebob Squarepants, Are You Afraid of te Dark
SYFY	Deadly Class
TBS	Full Frontal With Samantha Bee, The Misery Index (new), Snowpiercer (new)
TNT	All Elite Wrestling (new)
TruTV	Impractical Jokers, Tacoma FD
HBO	Watchmen (new)
Starz	Outlander
Amazon Prime	Jack Ryan, The Expanse
CBS All Access	Tell Me a Story, Star Trek: Discovery, Star Trek: Picard (new)
DC Universe	Titans, Harley Quinn (new)
Disney+	Marvel’s Hero Project (new)
Hulu	Marvel’s Runaways, Castle Rock, Reprisal (new), The Orville (formerly on FOX)
Netflix	Big Mouth, Lost in Space, 13 Reasons Why, She-Ra and the Princesses of Power, The Dragon Prince, Castlevania, Daybreak (new), SEIS MANOS (new), The Last Kids on Earth (new)
Shudder	Creepshow
YouTube	Impulse

 

 

Impact of Pre-Season Buzz

A number of new series with strong pre-season buzz have become instant successes (e.g., Desperate Housewives, Glee, The Walking Dead, Better Call Saul, and This is Us), while others have failed to find an audience (see Bionic Woman, Flash Forward, The Bastard Executioner, Pitch, and the Murphy Brown reboot). 

 

Many series that received little pre-season notice became long-running hits (examples include, NCIS, Grey’s Anatomy, Mad Men, The Big Bang Theory, Sons of Anarchy, and Rizzoli & Isles, to name just a few).

 

It is interesting, and perhaps counter-intuitive that over the past 15 or 20 years, the success rate of all new broadcast television series has been essentially the same as those that generated the most pre-season buzz – roughly one-third.  It’s also interesting to note that of all the series which have succeeded during the same period, about two-thirds did not receive a significant amount of pre-season buzz.

 

Pre-season buzz seems to have more of an impact on cable series, primarily because there are fewer of them and their ratings threshold for success is significantly lower than for broadcast networks.  They also often appeal to a more niche audience to whom it is easier to promote.    Since 2001, half of the most buzzed about new ad-supported cable shows became successful.  But there were nearly four times as many cable series that became hits without the benefit pre-season buzz.  One of the biggest factors here, of course, is that unlike the broadcast networks, cable nets long ago realized the benefit of cross-promoting one another’s programming.

 

There are several reasons why pre-season buzz has traditionally had little impact on whether or not a new broadcast series becomes successful:

 

• Despite the fact that their audiences tend to skew older, newspapers, comic con, and syndicated entertainment TV shows focus more on the younger, sexier series, rather than on shows their own viewers are most likely to watch. This has started to change over the past few seasons.

 

• The average median age of the typical broadcast series is over 50. This is not necessarily the same audience that is buzzing the most about new series online.  We have seldom seen non-super hero CBS shows get as much pre-season buzz other networks, but it has had more new series success than any other network over the past 15 years.

 

• Internet and comic con buzz are often heavily skewed toward sci-fi and super-hero series or shows with former sci-fi stars attached. Except for CW super hero shows, most broadcast efforts in this category tend not to live up to the hype.  Cable networks have traditionally had more success in this area.

 

• Most social-media-based pre-season buzz comes from people who might have seen a trailer online, but have not seen the full pilot and don’t know if the show is actually any good.

 

• People who discuss new shows online are not necessarily going to watch them on television – particularly if the series is scheduled opposite one of their favorites. This remains true even in today’s DVR, streaming video, time-shifted world (how much longer this continues to be true, however, remains to be seen).

 

• The impact of social media outlets, such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, is less clear at this point. There does seem to be some correlation with big-event programming – major sports or political events, award shows, season finales, etc.  But social media is currently more predictive of shows that are already on, rather than new series.  Discussions about shows people have already been watching, or have recently discovered, might provide an indication of whether a show is poised to grow or decline.  Social media’s impact on new series performance of scripted regular series, however, has so far been nominal at best.

 

Over the past 20 years, some of the most successful series received little pre-season attention.  These include, Without a Trace, Nip/Tuck (2002/03), NCIS, Two and a Half Men (2003/04), Lost, Grey’s Anatomy, House, The Closer (2004/05), Criminal Minds, How I Met Your Mother, Bones, Psych (2005/06), 30 Rock, Mad Men, Army Wives, Burn Notice (2006/07), The Big Bang Theory, Breaking Bad, In Plain Sight (2007/08), The Mentalist, Castle, Sons of Anarchy, Justified, Warehouse 13, Leverage, Royal Pains (2008/09), Modern Family, The Good Wife, Rizzoli & Isles, White Collar (2009/10), Hawaii Five-O, Blue Bloods, Hell on Wheels, Falling Skies (2010/11), Scandal, Person of Interest, American Horror Story (2011/12), Chicago Fire, The Americans (2012/13), Chicago P.D., The Last Ship (2013/14), Scorpion, Blackish, Empire (2014/15), Quantico, Into the Badlands, Queen of the South, The Outsiders, Underground (2015/16), Bull, Lethal Weapon, The Sinner (2016/17), The Good Doctor, Seal Team, SWAT (2017/18), Single Parents, Manifest, New Amsterdam (2018/19).

 

Who remembers Push Nevada, Firefly (2002/03), Coupling, Miss Match, Line of Fire (2003/04), Joey, LAX, Jack & Bobby (2004/05), Commander in Chief (2005/06), Studio 60 (2006/07), Pushing Daisies, Bionic Woman, Lipstick Jungle (2007/08), Dollhouse, 90210 (2008/09) Flash Forward (2009/10), Lone Star (2010/11), Charlie’s Angels, Terra Nova (2011/12), 666 Park Avenue (2012/13), The Crazy Ones, Michael J. Fox Show (2013/14), Constantine (2014/15), The Muppets, Heroes Reborn, The Bastard Executioner (2015/16), Pitch (2016/17), or Marvel’s Inhumans (2017/18)?  They were among the most heavily buzzed shows right before their respective seasons.  None made it to season two.

 

Evaluating series with the most pre-season buzz and whether a show is a success is, of course, somewhat subjective (except for the instant blockbusters).  You might quibble with a few of my entries.  Cable series have much lower audience thresholds of success than those on the broadcast networks, and tend to be given more time to build an audience.  Should a show like Mad Men, which never had strong ratings be called a success?  Well, it was on for seven seasons, won multiple Emmys and had a major impact on the medium.  But the way you need to look at the impact of pre-season buzz is not whether the show lasts a long time or is eventually successful.  It only matters how the show performs and impacts its host network during its first season.  Mad Men still qualifies in that it was critically acclaimed, performed better than the network’s average programming, and was instrumental in effectively re-branding the network.   

 

Mr. Robot (USA) did not make the cut because its hype and critical acclaim have not translated into good ratings, which, unless you are in the business, you probably wouldn’t know from the press coverage.  Supergirl did well after moving from CBS to CW– but despite being among the CBS’s top-10 rated series, it was essentially canceled by the network. 

 

I’ve been analyzing the television business for more than 30 years, and wrote annual TV Fall Preview reports for my company’s staff, advertiser clients, and the press.  I was able to refer to all of them while writing this piece (in addition to my own recollections from each season). 

 

The chart on the following pages shows new ad-supported original scripted series on broadcast and ad-supported cable since 2001 and compares the shows that received the most pre-season buzz to those that were successful during their initial season.  Going into the 2019-20 primetime TV season, I’m listing several shows as receiving the most buzz.  But there does seem to be less enthusiastic buzz for ad-supported new series over the past few seasons than any in recent memory.  This could be because there is so much fast-forwarding through commercials that many people aren’t seeing the promos and have no idea what’s coming on this fall, or it could be that there are so many original scripted series on cable during the summer and streaming services year-round that most people don’t focus on the new broadcast season as early as they once did.  Nevertheless, this lack of buzz does not mean there won’t be successful new series.  Just as heavy buzz does not correlate with success, lack of buzz does not correlate with failure.  It should be noted that 6 of the top-10 rated primetime series this season –This is Us, Manifest, The Good Doctor, Young Sheldon, FBI, and New Amsterdam – debuted over the past three seasons (and only two, This is Us and Young Sheldon (a spinoff of mega-hit, The Big Bang Theory) generated much pre-season buzz.

 

Pre-Season Buzz vs. Success

Season	Most Buzz	Most Successful
2001/02	Bob Patterson (ABC) Philly (ABC) Emeril (NBC) Watching Ellie (NBC) 24 (FOX) Enterprise (UPN) Smallville (WB)	The Guardian (CBS) Crossing Jordan (NBC) 24 (FOX) Smallville (WB)       The Shield (FX) Monk (USA)
2002/03	8 Simple Rules (ABC) Push Nevada (ABC) CSI: Miami (CBS) Boomtown (NBC) Girls Club (FOX) Firefly (FOX) Everwood (WB)	CSI: Miami (CBS) Without a Trace (CBS) Still Standing (CBS) Half and Half (UPN)       Nip/Tuck (FX)
2003/04	Line of Fire (ABC) Coupling (NBC) Whoopi (NBC) Miss Match (NBC) Skin (FOX) Arrested Development (FOX) Tarzan and Jane (WB)   Rescue Me (FX) The 4400 (USA) Stargate Atlantis (Syfy)	NCIS (CBS) Two and a Half Men (CBS) Cold Case (CBS) Las Vegas (NBC) The O.C. (FOX) One Tree Hill (WB)     Rescue Me (FX) The 4400 (USA)

 

2004/05	Desperate Housewives (ABC) CSI: NY (CBS) LAX (NBC) Law & Order: Trial By Jury (NBC) Father of the Pride (NBC) Joey (NBC) Jack and Bobby (WB)         Battlestar Galactica (SyFy)	Desperate Housewives (ABC) Lost (ABC) Grey’s Anatomy (ABC) Boston Legal (ABC) CSI: NY (CBS) Numb3ers (CBS) The Office (NBC) Medium (NBC) House (FOX) American Dad (FOX)   Battlestar Galactica (Syfy) The Closer (TNT)
2005/06	Commander in Chief (ABC) New Adv. Of Old Christine (CBS) My Name is Earl (NBC) Prison Break (FOX) Everybody Hates Chris (UPN)	Criminal Minds (CBS) Ghost Whisperer (CBS) How I Met Your Mother (CBS) Bones (FOX) Prison Break (FOX) Supernatural (WB) Everybody Hates Chris (UPN)   Kyle XY (ABC Family) Eureka (SyFy) Psych (USA)
2006/07	Ugly Betty (ABC) The Nine (ABC) Jericho (CBS) Heroes (NBC) Friday Night Lights (NBC) Studio 60 (NBC)   Damages (FX) Saving Grace (TNT)	Ugly Betty (ABC) Brothers and Sisters (ABC) Heroes (NBC) 30 Rock (NBC)     Mad Men (AMC) Army Wives (Lifetime) Saving Grace (TNT) Burn Notice (USA)
2007/08	Private Practice (ABC) Cavemen (ABC) Pushing Daisies (ABC) Cane (CBS) Bionic Woman (NBC) Lipstick Jungle (NBC) Gossip Girl (CW)	Private Practice (ABC) The Big Bang Theory (CBS) Gossip Girl (CW)         Secret Life of an Amer. Teen (AFAM) Breaking Bad (AMC) Law & Order: Criminal Intent (USA) In Plain Sight (USA)

 

2008/09	My Own Worst Enemy (NBC) Dollhouse (FOX) Fringe (FOX) 90210 (CW)	Castle (ABC) The Mentalist (CBS) Fringe (FOX)   Sons of Anarchy (FX) Justified (FX) Warehouse 13 (Syfy) Leverage (TNT) Royal Pains (USA)
2009/10	Flash Forward (ABC) Private Practice (ABC) NCIS: LA (CBS) Glee (FOX) Melrose Place (CW) Vampire Diaries (CW)     Men of a Certain Age (TNT) Southland (TNT) Hot in Cleveland (TV Land)	Modern Family (ABC) The Middle (ABC) Rookie Blue (ABC) NCIS: LA (CBS) The Good Wife (CBS) The Mentalist CBS) Glee (FOX) Vampire Diaries (CW)   Drop Dead Diva (Lifetime) Hot in Cleveland (TV Land) Rizolli & Isles (TNT) White Collar (USA)
2010/11	No Ordinary Family (ABC) Hawaii Five-O (CBS) $#*! My Dad Says (CBS) Law & Order: LA (NBC) Outlaw (NBC) Lone Star (FOX)   The Walking Dead (AMC) The Killing (AMC)	Hawaii Five-O (CBS) Mike & Molly (CBS) Blue Bloods (CBS) Raising Hope (FOX)       The Walking Dead (AMC) Hell on Wheels (AMC) Louie (FX) Portlandia (IFC) Awkward (MTV) Teen Wolf (MTV) Franklin & Bash (TNT) Falling Skies (TNT) Suits (TNT) Covert Affairs (USA)

 

2011/12		Charlie’s Angels (ABC) Once Upon a Time (ABC) Revenge (ABC) GCB (ABC) Pan Am (ABC) Terra Nova (FOX) Touch (FOX) New Girl (FOX) Smash (NBC) The Playboy Club (NBC) Ringer (CW)   Major Crimes (TNT)	Once Upon a Time (ABC) Scandal (ABC) 2 Broke Girls (CBS) Person of Interest (CBS) New Girl (FOX)               Longmire (A&E) Always Sunny in Phila. (FX) American Horror Story (FX) Flashpoint (ION) Major Crimes (TNT)
2012/13	Nashville (ABC) 666 Park Avenue (ABC) Go On (NBC) Revolution (NBC) Arrow (CW) Beauty & The Beast (CW)   Bates Motel (A&E)		Nashville (ABC) Elementary (CBS) Under the Dome (CBS) The Following (FOX) Chicago Fire (NBC) Arrow (CW)   Bates Motel (A&E) Orphan Black (BBCA) Being Mary Jane (BET) The Americans (FX) Vikings (History) Devious Maids (Life) Defiance (Syfy)
2013/14		Marvel Agents of Shield (ABC) Once Upon…Wonderland (ABC) Super Fun Night (ABC) The Crazy Ones (CBS) Hostages (CBS) Extant (CBS) 24: Live Another Day (FOX) Sleepy Hollow (FOX) The Blacklist (NBC) Michael J. Fox Show (NBC)   Fargo (FX)		Marvel Agents of Shield (ABC) The Goldbergs (ABC) Mom (CBS) 24: Live Another Day (FOX) Brooklyn Nine Nine (FOX) Sleepy Hollow (FOX) The Blacklist (NBC) Chicago PD (NBC) Night Shift (NBC) Originals (CW)   Fargo (FX) The Strain (FX) When Calls the Heart (Hall) The Last Ship (TNT) Murder in the First (TNT)

 

2014/15	How to Get Away - Murder (ABC) Marvel’s Agent Carter (ABC) Gotham (FOX) Constantine (NBC) The Flash (CW)           Better Call Saul (AMC) Mr. Robot (USA)		How to Get Away - Murder (ABC) Blackish (ABC) Madam Secretary (CBS) NCIS: New Orleans (CBS) Scorpion (CBS) Gotham (FOX) Empire (FOX) Mysteries of Laura (NBC) The Flash (CW)   Better Call Saul (AMC) Scream (MTV) The Librarians (TNT)
2015/16	The Muppets (ABC) Scream Queens (FOX) The X-Files (FOX) Heroes Reborn (NBC) Blindspot (NBC) DC Legends of Tomorrow (CW)   Fear the Walking Dead (AMC) Preacher (AMC) The Bastard Executioner (FX) Animal Kingdom (TNT)	Quantico (ABC) Life in Pieces (CBS) The X-Files (FOX) Blindspot (NBC) Shades of Blue (NBC) DC Legends of Tomorrow (CW)   Fear the Walking Dead (AMC) Preacher (AMC) Into the Badlands (AMC) Chesapeake Shores (Hall) Animal Kingdom (TNT) Queen of the South (USA) Underground (WGNA)
2016/17	Designated Survivor (ABC) Riverdale (CW) Prison Break (FOX) The Exorcist (FOX) Pitch (FOX) This is Us (NBC) Timeless (NBC) The Good Place (NBC)   Atlanta (FX) Legion (FX) Falling Water (USA)	Designated Survivor (ABC) Kevin Can Wait (CBS) Bull (CBS) Riverdale (CW) MacGyver (FOX) Lethal Weapon (FOX) This is Us (NBC) The Good Place (NBC)   Atlanta (FX) Legion (FX) Taboo (FX) Snowfall (FX) Queen Sugar (OWN) Claws (TNT) The Sinner (USA) Mr. Mercedes (Aud.)

 

2017/18	Marvel’s Inhumans (ABC) Roseanne/The Conners (ABC) Young Sheldon (CBS) Will & Grace (NBC) The Gifted (FOX) Ghosted (FOX) The Orville (FOX)   Marvel’s Cloak & Dagger (Freeform) Pose (FX) Krypton (SYFY)	The Good Doctor (ABC) Roseanne (ABC) Young Sheldon (CBS) Seal Team (CBS) S.W.A.T. (CBS) Will & Grace (NBC) The Orville (FOX)   Marvel’s Cloak & Dagger (Freeform) Lodge 49 (AMC) The Terror (AMC) Killing Eve (BBCA) Yellowstone (Par) Pose (FX)
2018/19	A Million Little Things (ABC) The Rookie (ABC) Magnum PI Murphy Brown (CBS) Charmed (CW) Legacies (CW) Beverly Hills 90210 (FOX)     Mayans MC (FX) The Purge (USA) PLL: The Perfectionists (Freeform)	A Million Little Things (ABC) The Rookie (ABC) Single Parents (ABC) Bless This Mess (ABC) The Neighborhood (CBS) Magnum PI (CBS) Manifest (NBC) New Amsterdam   Mayans MC (FX) Mr. Inbetween (FX) The Purge (USA) Project Blue Book (History)
2019/20	Mixed-ish (ABC) Emergence (ABC) Stumptown (ABC) Evil (CBS) Batwoman (CW)

Programs in bold are in both categories

Broadcast Network Promos - Dumb and Dumber

The broadcast networks have been promoting their summer shows and new fall series since mid-May.  Since we are deep into the traditional rerun season, I’m repeating something I’ve been calling for since the inception of The Sternberg Report – Cross-promote or die.

 

Last summer, my wife and I started watching CBS’s summer drama, Instinct.  It recently returned for a new season to low ratings.  This did not surprise me at all.  I follow television for a living and this is one of the shows I was looking forward to, and yet I had no idea that it was back on the air.  While we watch a fair amount of CBS during the “regular” season, we don’t watch much on the network during the summer.  Had CBS been willing or able to promote the show on other broadcast networks, the chance we’d have known it had returned for a new season would have risen dramatically. 

 

To examine how much promotion the broadcast networks are wasting, I examined a full week of primetime programming on ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX (Monday, July 8^th – Sunday, July 14^th).  Here are some of my findings:

 

• CBS’s new summer reality series, Love Island, which airs five nights a week, was by far the network’s most promoted show, running 26 promos during this one week. Yet its initial ratings were extremely disappointing.  Imagine if Love Island was also promoted on ABC’s The Bachelorette, which might appeal to a similar audience, rather than wasting promotions on the network’s own incompatible series.  There is simply no doubt that it would have gotten more viewer sampling.

 

• CBS also promoted its new fall series – Evil (19 promos), All Rise (15), Bob Abishola (13), The Unicorn (15), and Carol’s Second Act (9) – as well as its summer scripted drama, Blood & Treasure (6) and season 1 of CBS All Access’s The Good Fight (7), which is airing on CBS this summer.  The network also heavily promoted its returning reality show, Big Brother (15).  All would perform better were they allowed to also be promoted on other broadcast networks’ shows that appealed to similar viewers. 

 

• FOX aired 17 promos for Beverly Hills 90210, which is returning with its original cast members. Most of its potential viewers probably have no idea it is debuting this August.  Had it been able to advertise on similar skewing shows on other broadcast networks, a lot more people would know about it and tune in.

 

• FOX’s new fall drama, Prodigal Son, centers around the son of a serial killer who grows up to help the FBI catch other serial killers. The pilot was excellent, but it might be doomed to failure simply because it’s on FOX, which has no similar programming.  But what if it could be promoted on CBS’s Criminal Minds and Instinct, and NBC’s Law & Order: SVU?  I think you know the answer – more awareness among potential viewers and a better chance to succeed.

 

• ABC has been heavily promoting its three new fall scripted series, Mixed-ish (15), Stumptown (12), and Emergence (12). During this one-week period, the network was also heavily promoting two of its summer game shows, Holey Moley (17) and Celebrity Family Feud (13).  Their modest ratings undoubtedly would be higher if ABC could promote them on other broadcast networks in addition to its own.  The network gave less promotion to its other summer game shows – Family Food Fight (5), Match Game (5), Card Sharks (4), 100,000 Pyramid (3), Press Your Luck (3), and To Tell the Truth (2).  ABC also had a surprisingly few promos for The Bachelorette (7).  The network also aired a few promos for FX series, Mayans MC and Snowfall, and Nat Geo series, Gordon Ramsey Uncharted (Disney acquired FX and Nat Geo from FOX).  These numbers may vary as the summer progresses.

 

• NBC heavily promoted its summer reality and game shows, most notably Bring the Funny (25), America’s Got Talent (20), and Hollywood Game Night (18), with lesser promotion going to American Ninja Warrior (8), and Songland (4). They are able to perform reasonably well because NBC has numerous similar programs in which to promote them.  The network also promoted its new scripted drama, The In-Between (6), as well as returning fall series, This is Us (11), New Amsterdam (7), and Superstore (5), asking viewers to catch up with episodes on demand.  NBC provided 6 promos for its sibling cable network USA’s Suits spin-off, Pearson.

 

• All the networks had ads that mentioned Netflix or Amazon Prime Video, while CBS and FOX each had an ad for the Netflix series, Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee.

 

I’ve had numerous conversations with broadcast network executives over the years, asking why they refuse to accept advertising from other broadcast networks.  Comments have ranged from, “that’s a stupid question” to “it’s an ego thing” to “our affiliates wouldn’t like it” to “why would we promote our biggest competitors?” to “it’s better to hurt the other networks than to help any of them do better than us.”  This last response is really the key to this stupidity.

 

I’ve been making this point for several years, and it’s worth repeating.  If you ask any top broadcast network executive whether they would rather lose 10% of their audience but move from second or third into first place, or gain 10% and fall to third place, they would all take lower ratings and first place.  Among ad-supported cable networks, they would rather lose viewers and move into the top 10, than gain viewers and fall out of the top 10. Having run the ad sales research operation at a major cable network, I can tell you that the difference between ranking 10^th and 11^th (with identical ratings) was the difference between joy and misery.           

 

Not promoting your programming on the largest available platforms to the largest groups of your target audience, is dumb.  Not caring whether your ratings decline as long as the other broadcast networks decline more is even dumber.

 

But to be fair, I compiled a list of pros and cons to determine if it is really a good idea for the broadcast networks to cross-promote one another’s programming.

 

Pros and Cons of Broadcast Networks Cross-Promoting Their Programs

	Pros	Cons
1	Promote series on the highest-rated platforms available.
2	Advertise to largest group of potential viewers, who are watching similar programs and are most receptive to your message.
3	Dramatically increase awareness of mid-season and summer series.
4	Substantially improve viewer sampling for new fall series.
5	End the counter-productive practice of only accepting advertising from broadcast network competitors (such as Netflix and HBO).
6	Lead to more broadcast successes, which will benefit every broadcast network.
7	Best chance to stem the tide of broadcast audience erosion.

 

I’ll leave you with this simple question.  In what other industry do marketers refuse to advertise to the largest group of available consumers, in the bullseye of their target audience, who they know are interested in and use similar products, who at that moment are most receptive to their message?  Only the broadcast networks.

 

There’s no law that says their ratings have to decline every year.  But as long as they provide the highest rated platforms to their competitors but not to one another, and as long as they place more value on rankings than actual viewers, and as long as advertisers see nothing wrong with paying more each season for a shrinking product, I don’t expect much to change anytime soon.  Wouldn’t it be nice for once if I wa

How to Make the Emmys More Viewer Friendly

Last year’s Emmy Awards broadcast was the least watchable I’ve ever seen (and I’ve been watching them forever). It seemed sparse, hollow, and low-budget.  Most of the skits were not funny in the slightest. They seemed intent on driving away older viewers (my mother-in-law couldn’t take watching it after about 30 minutes), without having any idea how to appeal to a younger crowd.  The structure of the show was awkward and disconnected – announcing the nominees, then bringing out celebrity presenters to banter, and then announcing the winners.  By the time they got to presenting each award, I forgot who was nominated.

 

Aside from the unfortunate structure of the show, the Emmys continues to award TV series that most people haven’t seen, which only serves to depress ratings.  How many viewers have actually watched The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (best actress, supporting actress in a comedy), Barry (best actor, supporting actor in a comedy), The Americans (best actor in a drama), The Crown (best actress in a drama), Westworld (best supporting actress in a drama) or Godless (best supporting actor and actress in a limited series)?  Not many.  Game of Thrones (outstanding drama series, best actor) was the lone major award winner with a sizable audience.

 

The Emmys have alternated broadcast networks over the years because of the once true notion that the telecast is a major promotional vehicle for all the broadcast networks. This, of course, is no longer the case.  Of the 67 major comedy and drama nominees – best comedy, best drama, and the actor/actress and supporting actor/actress categories – HBO and Netflix led the way with a combined 29 nominations (43%), 16 and 13, respectively, while the five broadcast networks accounted for a total of just 15 (22%), five of which were for Saturday Night Live.

 

None of the major acting or outstanding series awards for comedy or drama went to a broadcast network show.  In fact, a broadcast series hasn’t won best drama since 24 in 2006.  In 2017, This is Us was the first broadcast drama even nominated in six years (it was also nominated in 2018).  In 2018, Black-ish was the only broadcast network comedy nominated.  This year, there may be none (unless they decide to honor the final season of Big Bang Theory).

 

TV series that air on different venues have different creative limitations based on levels of language, sex, and violence, and whether they must answer to advertisers. Having them all compete with one another is inherently unfair, and works against the more traditional broadcast networks. The obvious solution is to divide the awards into three categories – ad-supported, premium cable, and streaming services.

 

For the ad-supported drama category, we might see This is Us, Madam Secretary, Better Call Saul, Killing Eve, Yellowstone, and Pose competing with one another. For premium cable we might see competition among Game of Thrones, Westworld, Homeland, Big Little Lies, American Gods, Billions, and Vida. And for streaming dramas we might get The Handmaid’s Tale, competing with Ozark, Bosch, Bodyguard, The Good Fight, Stranger Things, and The Crown. We’d get a similarly diverse group of shows in the comedy categories.

 

We also might get to see some stellar acting performances such as Titus Welliver (Bosch), Krysten Ritter (Jessica Jones), Alice Braga (Queen of the South), Billy Bob Thornton (Goliath), and Giovanni Ribisi (Sneaky Pete) – finally get some well-deserved Emmy recognition.

 

This way, more television series that people have actually seen would be up for major awards without negatively impacting the high-quality shows that are only available to half the country or less. There’s little doubt that ratings would improve as well. Otherwise, let Netflix or HBO have the Emmys. In its current form it has become a vehicle to promote the broadcast networks’ competitors, so why not let one of them air it.  Given that the broadcast networks have just extended their rights to alternate the award show, however, now would be a good time to implement these changes.

New Season Pilots - the Good, the Almost Good, and the Not So Good

For American television viewers, the official start of the new primetime television season is still three months away.  But the recent network upfront presentations and the release of the fall pilots to industry insiders has placed thoughts of September squarely into June.

 

In today’s video world, the very idea of a fall TV season seems antiquated.  Cable networks debut original scripted series throughout the year, most often in spring or summer when the broadcast networks air largely repeats or reality shows.  OTT streaming services, such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video, drop new series whenever they are ready to go.  But the broadcast networks still have the most and the highest rated original scripted series (The Walking Dead notwithstanding), so as long as they continue to premiere so many programs over a two-or three-week period in September, the new “fall season” will be relevant.

 

I’ve been analyzing television programming for roughly 30 years, and have seen many good pilots flop as regular series, but also more than a few poor performing pilots build into hits.  Increasingly, however, the latter is harder to come by.  Long gone are the days when a Miami Vice can start out slowly and become a word-of-mouth success over the summer.  Or a Seinfeld can take three years to find an audience and grow into an iconic hit.  Or an Everybody Loves Raymond can start out on Friday with low ratings, move to Monday and become one of the highest rated comedies on television.  The TV landscape is simply too splintered and too competitive.  These and many other long-running hits might be canceled after just a few episodes if they premiered today.

 

That’s why on-air promotion is more important than ever.  I’m hoping against hope that the broadcast networks finally smarten up and start cross-promoting one another’s new shows.  The networks should also promote new shows much further into the regular season than they do now.

 

Let’s hope the networks have the fortitude to give shows they believe in but are not instant hits a chance to build.  We will always have Empire, This is Us, Young Sheldon, and The Good Doctor – shows that immediately strike a chord with viewers.  But we could also use another Cheers, which debuted as the lowest rated show of the week, but ended its 11-year run among the top 10.

 

While it is clear that broadcast networks ratings continue to decline, and there are more competitors than ever nipping at their heels, there are a number of positive signs going forward.  Chief among them are that 58 of the top 60 rated series are still on broadcast TV, and 7 of the top 10 rated original scripted series debuted within the past three seasons.  Will any from the current batch join them in the top 10?  Read on…

 

Evaluating the New Pilots

A recent edition of The Sternberg Report, titled A Young Media Person’s Guide to Evaluating Pilots, laid out several criteria for determining the success potential of a new series.  I just want to reiterate a few of them here, and provide some examples based on this year’s new shows.

 

• A comedy should be funny because of the characters, not the plot. In other words, does something specific happen in the pilot to make it funny?  Is there some kind of fish out of water storyline?  Does someone switch jobs, suddenly become poor or rich, move from a small town to the big city or vice-versa?  You get the idea.  Often times these plot driven comedy pilots can be hilarious, but they essentially become different shows by the second episode.  That’s not to say some of these don’t succeed, it’s just more difficult to keep them going week after week, and more difficult to predict their success potential based solely on the pilot.  The new pilots that fell into this category last season, included, CBS’s The Neighborhood and Happy Together, and FOX’s Rel.  Only The Neighborhood was able to maintain the funny on a weekly basis.  New fall pilots that fit into this category include, ABC’s Mixed-ish, CBS’s Carol’s Second Act and Bob      Abishola, and NBC’s Perfect Harmony.

 

On the other hand, some of the funniest comedy pilots of all time, including The Cosby Show, Golden Girls, Roseanne, Home Improvement, 30 Rock, Modern Family, and The Big Bang Theory, had nothing memorable happen in the pilot.  That’s because they were funny not because of the plot, but rather because the characters were funny, had strong chemistry, and people wanted to see them interact week after week irrespective of storylines or plot devices.  Comedies that fit this mold this season include, ABC’s Single Parents and The Kids Are Alright (unfortunately the latter was canceled despite being an excellent show and getting similar ratings to the former).  There are no new comedies of this type in the fall, which is unfortunate.

 

• What will a new drama’s third episode look like? Is it a good one-time movie or will it work as a weekly series?  Some of the things you look at to predict comedy success also apply to dramas.  Are there specific events or guest stars in the pilot that drive the story but won’t exist by the second episode?  Medical, police, or legal dramas can seem compelling based solely on the case covered in the pilot.  We need to consider the strengths and charisma of the lead and supporting characters, and ongoing themes of the series beyond the pilot’s script.

 

I pegged ABC The Good Doctor as one of best medical drama pilots I had ever seen.  I also cited ABC’s mid-season series, For the People as one of the better legal drama pilots I had seen.  The former is one of the highest rated dramas on TV, but the latter has been canceled after two modest mid-season showings.  Last season, I thought ABC’s A Million Little Things could be a hit, and NBC’s Manifest could work if they executed it well on a weekly basis.  Both had excellent pilots, and both succeeded (although Manifest declined over the course of the season).  On the other hand, I was not impressed with NBC’s New Amsterdam, although I did say it would get good viewer sampling following The Voice and This is Us.  People did sample it and stayed, as it became a solid hit.

 

For procedural dramas, does the cast gel and are there enough humorous elements that people will want to tune in to slight variations of the same situation week after week.  This can be telling when you compare series in the same genre – the differences between the excellent Criminal Minds and the canceled Criminal Minds Beyond Borders, or the original CSI and the short-lived CSI Cyber are dramatic (and highlight the importance of good casting).  All of the NCIS’s, on the other hand, managed to find the right formula – drama, humor, compatible cast – and all are hits.  I wasn’t sure about CBS’s FBI.  The pilot was run-of-the-mill, but I predicted it would get decent viewer sampling, as most CBS procedurals do.  It did, and the series became much better than the pilot – it now ranks third among total viewers for network procedurals, only behind NCIS and Law & Order: SVU.  It will be interesting to see how the mid-season FBI spinoff performs.

 

• Shows Make Stars, Stars Don’t Make Shows. The failed TV series with major stars attached are too numerous to list here.  In most cases, it’s the show that makes the star, not the other way around.  Hit shows, ranging from comedies such as, Friends, The Big Bang Theory, and Modern Family, to broadcast dramas such as, E.R., Grey’s Anatomy, and This is Us, were cast largely with actors who were not well known to the general public at the time.

 

Some stars, such as Tom Selleck (Blue Bloods) or James Spader (The Blacklist), can bring long-time fans to a new series (and usually appeal to an older audience).  But they are the exception. Established stars (more commonly TV personalities) bring high viewer expectations, based on other popular roles, which are often hard to live up to.  New shows this fall that can be considered among this group include, ABC’s Stumptown (Cobie Smulders), CBS’s Carol’s Second Act (Patricia Heaton), and Bob      Abishola (Billy Gardell), NBC’s Perfect Harmony (Bradley Whitford) and Bluff City Law (Jimmy Smits), and FOX’s Almost Family (Timothy Hutton, Brittany Snow).  You can decide for yourself if any of them qualify as “stars.”

 

Here is my take on all the broadcast network fall pilots. 

 

These are not my predictions of hits and misses per se, but rather which new pilots I liked and which ones have potential.    

 

By way of definition:  those I label “The Good,” have excellent casts, are executed well, and have the best chance to succeed; the “Almost Good” are not quite at the level of The Good, but have potential, and if promoted properly could work; the “Not So Good” pilots are either of the cookie cutter variety, just miss the mark, or are simply nothing special. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Evaluating the 2019 Fall Primetime Pilots

Net	Day/Time	Program	Comment
The Good
ABC	Tue. 9-9:30	Mixed-ish (Family Comedy)	Rainbow Johnson (the mom from Black-ish) recounts her experiences growing up in a mixed-race family in the 1980s, as her hippie parents (black mom, white dad) moved from a commune to the suburbs when she was 12.  She and her siblings have to suddenly navigate a mainstream school where they are perceived as neither black nor white.  Tracee Ellis Ross, narrates, using a similar device as Young Sheldon.  Arica Hammel plays the young Bow Johnson.  Gary Cole is her well-to-do corporate grandfather, who has very different ideas of what the kids need to cope with the real world.   Has potential sandwiched between BlessThis Mess and Black-ish.  The pilot was good, but we’ll need to see how it’s executed on a weekly basis.   From ABC Studios.
ABC	Tue. 10-11	Emergence (Mystery Drama)	Allison Tollman is excellent aa a police chief who finds a mysterious young girl (Alexa Swinton) at the site of a mysterious plane crash.  The girl is uninjured and has no memory of what happened.  Mysterious people are after her, so the police chief takes her in to protect her as she investigates.  As you can guess, a conspiracy larger than she ever imagined will gradually unravel, with the child’s identity at the center of it all.   The pilot and the cast are excellent.  Seems similar to NBC’s Manifest (which may be why NBC passed on it).  This type of complicated, high-concept series is often difficult to maintain over a full season.  Might be better as a 6-episode limited-run than an ongoing series.  Airing opposite CBS’s NCIS New Orleans and NBC’s New Amsterdam won’t make it any easier to find an audience.   From ABC Studios.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Evaluating the 2018/19 Primetime Pilots

Net	Day/Time	Program	Comment
The Good
CBS	Thu. 9:30-10	Carol’s Second Act (Workplace Comedy)	Patricia Heaton will try for her third hit sitcom (following Everybody Loves Raymond and The Middle).  Here, she embarks on a second act, after raising her children, getting divorced, and retiring from teaching.  At age 50, she’s a medical intern, dealing with a tough boss and other interns who are half her age.   Probably got the idea from ABC’s The Rookie.  Patricia Heaton is always likeable, and the CBS sitcom audience should eat this up.   From Four Boys Entertainment, Kapital Entertainment, and CBS Television Studios.
CBS	Thu. 10-11	Evil (Psychological Mystery)	A skeptical female psychologist (Katja Herbers) and priest-in-training (Mike Colter) join to investigate the Church’s backlog of unsolved mysteries, including supposed demonic possessions, straddling the line between science and religion.  Michael Emerson also stars.   I liked the pilot.  Unfortunately, it’s not compatible with its lead-ins or anything else on CBS’s schedule, and the absurd (and frankly stupid) broadcast network policy of accepting ads from their competitors but not from one another, might cause another worthy show to not find an audience.  Airing opposite ABC’s How to Get Away With Murder and NBC’s Law & Order: SVU won’t help.   From CBS Television Studios.
CW	Sun. 8-9	Batwoman (Superhero Action Drama)	Three years after Batman mysteriously disappeared from Gotham City, Bruce Wayne’s cousin, Kate Kane, has his batsuit modified to fit a woman, and picks up the mantle as the dark knight vigilante.  Based on the characters from DC.    Ruby Rose is perfect as the new Caped Crusader (the first openly gay superhero on television).  Should fit well paired with Supergirl on Sundays.   From Berlanti Productions in association with Warner Bros. Television.

 

 

Evaluating the 2019 Fall Primetime Pilots

Net	Day/Time	Program	Comment
The Good
NBC	Thu. 8:30-9	Perfect Harmony (Comedy)	Bradley Whitford stars as a gruff former Princeton music professor with big-town sensibilities, who stumbles into a small-town church’s choir practice.  He agrees to stay and help them, and, of course, they wind up helping each other.   I expected to dislike this one, but was pleasantly surprised.  It’s the best new comedy of the fall, and NBC will give it a good chance to succeed, airing it between Superstore and The Good Place on Thursday.  A lot will depend on how the ensemble supporting cast, led by Anna Camp, gels over time.   From 20th Century Fox Television and Small Dog Picture Company.
FOX	Mon. 9-10	Prodigal Son (Crime Drama)	A darkly comedic twist on the serial killer genre.  Tom Payne portrays the son of a convicted serial killer (Michael Sheen) who has made hunting serial killers his life’s work.  When his recklessness gets him fired from the FBI, he becomes a consultant to the NYPD and his former mentor (Lou Diamond Phillips).   The pilot was very good.  Not fitting the mold of other FOX series might hurt – if only it could advertise on CBS’s Criminal Minds and FBI.  I’m sure it will be heavily promoted on FOX’s football broadcasts.   From Berlanti Productions in association with Warner Bros. Television.
The Almost Good
ABC	Wed. 10-11	Stumptown (Detective Drama)	Cobie Smulders stars as a strong, assertive, and smart army veteran, whose military intelligence skills make her a great private investigator.  Her love life, gambling debts, and a brother she needs to take care of in Portland Oregon, make her life complicated, as does her uneasy alliance with the police.   While I like Cobie Smulders in virtually everything she does, this seems too run-of-the-mill to get a large following – particularly opposite CBS’s S.W.A.T and NBC’s Chicago P.D., which appeal to a similar audience.  The name of the show doesn’t help (even though it’s based on the graphic novel of the same name).   From ABC Studios

Evaluating the 2019 Fall Primetime Pilots

Net	Day/Time	Program	Comment
The Almost Good
CBS	Mon. 9-10	All Rise (Legal Drama)	A highly regarded African-American deputy district attorney (Simone Missick) in L.A. pushes boundaries and expectations as a newly appointed Superior Court Judge.  Wilson Bethel and Marg Helgenberger also star.   Nothing we haven’t seen before.  Its potential audience will probably be watching Dancing With the Stars or The Voice.   From Warner Bros. Television.
CBS	Thu. 8:30-9	The Unicorn (Family/ Romantic Comedy)	Walter Goggins stars as a widowed father of two adolescent daughters who, with the help of a tight-knit group of friends and family, has been trying to cope with his new normal.  As he starts to date again, he finds he is a “unicorn” – the perfect single guy – employed, attractive, and with a proven track record of commitment.   Hammocked between Young Sheldon and Mom, CBS is giving it every chance to succeed.  The pilot was decent.   From CBS Television Studios.
CW	Wed. 9-10	Nancy Drew (Mystery Drama)	Brilliant teenage detective, Nancy Drew (Kennedy McMann), will solve mysteries every week, some with supernatural elements, in her hometown of Horseshoe Bay, Maine (with the help of some other teens she gets in trouble with in the pilot).   Compatible with its Riverdale lead-in, which doesn’t necessarily mean it will retain the audience.  Pilot was OK, but nothing special.   From CBS Television Studios in association with Fake Empire.  Will the fact that it is produced by CBS Studios mean it will be promoted on CBS?  Of course not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Evaluating the 2019 Fall Primetime Pilots

Net	Day/Time	Program	Comment
The Almost Good
NBC	Mon. 10-11	Bluff City Law (Legal Drama)	Jimmy Smits portrays the head of a celebrated law firm and a famous Memphis family known for taking on injustice.  His estranged daughter, a brilliant lawyer in her own right (Caitlin McGee), comes back to the fold when her philanthropist mother dies suddenly.   While I always like Jimmy Smits, the surrounding cast didn’t do much for me, and the pilot fell flat.  Seems like a cookie-cutter legal drama.  Maybe it will get better in subsequent episodes.  Airing opposite ABC’s The Good Doctor and CBS’s Bull won’t help its chances.   From Universal Television in association with David Janollari Entertainment.
FOX	Wed. 9-10	Almost Family (Family Drama)	An only child (Brittany Snow) has her life turned upside down when her father (Timothy Hutton), a pioneering fertility doctor, is arrested for using his own sperm to father more than a hundred children.  Now she has wo new sisters (Magalyn Echikunwoke, Emily Osment).  They have to welcome a tidal wave of new siblings into their expanding family.   The pilot was interesting, and I think it has potential as a series.  Not sure about this one.   From Universal Television in association with True Jack Productions.  Will the fact that this is produced by Universal Television mean it will be promoted by NBC Universal?  Of course not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Evaluating the 2019 Fall Primetime Pilots

Net	Day/Time	Program	Comment
The Not So Good
CBS	Mon. 8:30-9	BOB ABISHOLA (Family Comedy)	Middle-aged, out of shape white guy (Billy Gardell) has heart attack and falls in love with his Nigerian immigrant cardiac nurse (Folake Olowofoyeku).  Only in the world of CBS sitcoms…   Not really bad, but just another in a long string of interchangeable Monday 8:30pm CBS sitcoms.   From Chuck Lorre Productions in association with Warner Bros. Television.
NBC	Thu. 9:30-10	Sunnyside (Comedy)	Kai Penn stars as a former New York City Councilman (the youngest ever), the pride of Queens, who has spent the last 15 years partying with celebrities rather than serving his constituents.  He gets drummed out of office after a video of him getting busted for public intoxication goes viral.  He gets hired by a diverse group of individuals who dream of becoming American Citizens, and think he can help teach them what they need to know to pass their citizenship test.   Proof that diversity and funny are not synonyms.  Should get some viewer sampling following The Good Place, but unless it gets a lot better than the pilot, it won’t last long.   From Universal Television in association with Fremulon and 3 Arts Entertainment.

 

 

How to Improve Pilot Viewer Sampling

At this year’s upfront presentations to advertisers, the broadcast networks reiterated something they basically remind us of every year – that they, the broadcast networks, are still the best platform for reaching viewers and impacting sales.  And they are correct.  Viewers spend about five times as many hours watching traditional TV than all other screens combined, and the broadcast networks, which account for 58 of the top 60 rated primetime series, are still the best advertising vehicles out there.  And yet, inexplicably, they continue to stubbornly refuse to utilize the broadcast networks to advertise and promote their own product.

 

Cable networks long ago realized 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 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 – which is exactly what happened. 

 

Of course, it made sense at the time, since cable networks were trying to compete with the much bigger, stronger, and more established broadcast networks.  They initially saw themselves more as allies than competitors.  The broadcast networks, on the other hand, once controlled more than 90% of all television viewing, and traditionally have only seen one another as competitors.  They competed so fiercely for every rating point and to move up in the standings, that cross-promotion was unfathomable.  Unlike cable networks, the broadcasters also needed to answer to their affiliates, which have traditionally been adamantly opposed yto promoting other channels – even when they started taking ads for cable networks, it was initially hard to get done, and typically not day and date.

 

The competitive video landscape today is worlds beyond where it was back then.  It is not the 1980s or 1990s anymore.  A broadcast hit on one network actually does benefit all networks.  When an Empire, This is Us, The Good Doctor, or Young Sheldon takes off, people start believing in the power of network TV again.  Except for the occasional cable phenomenon like Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead, no other platform is capable of generating the audience of a successful broadcast network series.  The broadcast networks will accept advertising from their real competitors – ad-supported cable networks, HBO, Showtime, and even Netflix, but, strangely, not from one another.

 

In what other business does a company refuse to advertise its product to the largest and most persuadable customers available?  These aren’t just random consumers the broadcast networks are choosing not to pursue.  These are their prime prospects, whom the networks know are already watching similar programming, who are at that moment at their most receptive toward receiving a message about other TV programs.  They are already watching and engaged with the exact type of program the networks are trying to promote to them.  I’m not sure how to say it more plainly.

 

If I was a producer or actor in new series that isn’t in the same moId as its network’s other series, I would be quite frustrated that the show couldn’t be promoted on compatible broadcast programs on other networks.  The very idea that a series produced by CBS Studios, for example, can’t be promoted on CBS simply because it airs on ABC is absurd.

 

Is there any real question why Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu, who can each advertise on 100% of the strongest ad platforms, continue to gain ground on those who can only advertise on 20% of the strongest ad platforms?  As the broadcast networks and the ARF continually tell us every year, advertising works.

 

I have no doubt that if the broadcast networks started cross-promoting one another’s shows, new series viewer sampling (and subsequently, success rates) would rise dramatically.  In a MediaPost article last year, I opined that networks only care about how they rank among one another, not whether they actually grow their audience – short-term thinking that could lead to long-term disaster.  If they continue to not advertise to the biggest chunk of available viewers, it proves the point

 

The networks have already started promoting their new fall series, and it won’t take long to see which ones they think have the most potential (based on which ones receive the most promotional weight).  There hasn’t been much pre-season buzz for any new show yet, but we’ll see if that changes following the big San Diego Comic Con in July.

 

The September issue of The Sternberg Report will take an in-depth look at how much pre-season buzz actually affects the success potential of new series.

The Last of the TV Generation Turns 50 This Year - So Why Do We Care About Adults 18-49?

As the youngest members of the TV Generation turn 50 this year (and the oldest approach 70), it’s ironic that the press and much of the advertising industry still think of Adults 18-49 as the key demographic segment for evaluating television viewing.

 

Broad demographic segments, such as 18-49 and 25-54, were implemented for the buying and selling of commercial time in an era of single TV households and few viewing choices (most households had fewer than 10 channels).  Adults 18-34 and 35-49 tended to watch the same primetime programs, as did parents and their kids.  Many don’t remember that before people meters debuted in 1987, demographic data was only available from Nielsen 36 weeks of the year.  It didn’t concern people back then because viewing patterns didn’t change much once the new season got underway.  Even low-rated programs tended to last an entire season before being canceled.  In short, it was a completely different television landscape and a very different video viewing world. 

 

Yet there are a few reasons why these anachronistic age groupings, where sub-segments have significantly different video viewing habits from one another, continue be the foundation of audience analysis.

 

• The broadcast networks have been hesitant to provide upfront audience guarantees on narrower age segments. The feeling has always been that narrower groups, such as 18-34 or 25-49 are not as stable as broader demographics and therefore it’s more difficult to project future ratings performance.  While this was the case 30 years ago, it is no longer true.  The wide rating gaps in primetime programming in the age of Thursday night “Must See TV,” don’t really exist today.  For example, season-to-date, only 2 rating points separate the #3 ranked scripted series from the #100 ranked show.  It’s much easier to estimate future program performance for both returning and new series than it used to be.

 

• When I studied marketing and advertising in college, I was told that it was important to get consumers when they are younger and forming brand loyalties, which will stay with them the rest of their lives. Older consumers don’t switch brands as much.  The over-50 crowd is significantly different today, and this is no longer really true (but people always remember what they were taught in college or when starting their careers.

 

• When I started working in this business, I was told that younger viewers are much more difficult to reach than older viewers, so targeting them is more important. You’ll get the older folks no matter what you do.  With many more viewing options today, and a much more splintered video environment, this also is no longer the case.

 

• It is easier to get press coverage for a single demographic. Reporters jobs would be much more difficult if every time they wrote stories on network or program performance they had to cover five or six different demographic segments.

 

The TV Generation, those born between 1950 and 1969, are nothing like their parents were at the same age – they have more disposable income, they are more active, they are more likely to try new brands and products, and they often see retirement as a new beginning, rather than approaching the end.  They, along with the generation that followed them, the Multi-Channel Generation (born between 1970 and 1989), are the key viewers of traditional linear television, and should be the main focus of many advertisers.  They are also the last two generations that see commercials as normal and necessary rather than annoying and intrusive.

 

People in the same generation typically have similar collective experiences and demonstrate similarities in attitudes, as well as how they relate to both the world around them and media.  Pre-2000, most people obtained access to the same media distribution system, same channels, same programs, and same media devices.  When they watched specific television programs, they did so at the same time (if they were in the same time zone).  This was true both within and across generations. Over the past decade, however, media access and viewing has become so splintered, once cohesive generations have several sub groups, depending on which media devices they own and which streaming services (if any) they subscribe to – everyone doesn’t get everything anymore.  But how most people relate to media, programming, and commercials continue to be specific to that generation.

 

Here are some of the differences among generations in how they relate to video.

 

• The Pre-TV Generation (1924-1949)
  • Grew up with radio, introduction of television, one TV per household, few channels, few choices, no remote control, no end-user technology.
  • Families gathered around the console TV (as they had with radio).
  • Portable small-screen TV was new technology.
  • The heaviest TV viewers – first stop still the broadcast networks or cable networks that air off-network series.
  • See advertising on TV as normal and necessary.

 

• The TV Generation (1950-1969)
  • Grew up with one screen, few choices, three or four broadcast networks – could only watch something at the time the TV station aired it (kids looked forward to the annual showing of The Wizard of Oz).
  • Most households only had one TV set, and families still watched TV together (in the 1970s, All in the Family was the #1 show among all age groups for five years in a row).
  • Teens and young adults in early days of ad-supported cable.
  • Remote control was new technology.
  • Still heavy TV viewers of broadcast and cable television.
  • See TV advertising as necessary to lower costs.

 

• The Multi-Channel Generation (1970-1989)
  • First generation to grow up with remote control, cable, and more than three broadcast networks. First generation with widespread programming to kids outside of Saturday Morning. 
  • As more households get multiple TV sets, and channels start to expand, younger and older viewers start to watch different things.
  • VCRs and the internet were new technology.
  • The last cohesive generation, where almost everyone got almost everything. The VCR was the last universally purchased device for watching video.
  • Traditional TV is still their first screen, but other screens continue to grow, and streaming has become commonplace.
  • See TV advertising as a necessary evil.

 

• The Multi-Platform Generation (1990-2004)
  • First generation to grow up with search engines, high-speed internet, social media, DVRs, on-demand, video streaming, and multimedia devices.
  • First generation to grow up in the era of Peak TV – original scripted series no longer exclusive to broadcast networks.
  • DVRs, smartphones, and multimedia devices were new technology.
  • Content is more important than distribution system. They see little difference between broadcast, cable, or streaming. 
  • See TV advertising as intrusive and annoying – they are used to fast-forwarding through commercials via DVRs or streaming commercial-free tv.

 

• The Mobile Generation (2005- )
  • Growing up watching what they want, when they want, where they want.
  • TV/video is everywhere – see little distinction between broadcast, cable, SVOD, or YouTube. Content means everything, distribution source or screen means little.

 

Predicting what will affect this generation most, and how they will relate to the world or media, is not really possible right now.  Anytime you try to predict what will happen 5 or 10 years down the road, you are constricted by current technology and historical perspective.  New technology and innovation, as well as consumer trends and attitudes, are perpetually around the corner.  When they appear, they fundamentally change current thinking, making predictions of yesterday obsolete.  The virtually continuous change to the video environment we’ve seen over the past 20 years may finally be slowing, which could extend the time frame of this generation.   

 

As more and more subscription video streaming services and media devices become available, disposable income, is going to be among the greatest indicators of media access and usage.Broad age groupings such as Adults 18-49 and 25-54 are no longer meaningful.  Previous standard generations (such as Baby Boomers and Generation X) are not as cohesive in terms of media availability and usage as they once were.  Subsequent generations are even less so.  It is more important than ever to reassess how groups of consumers are evaluated, based on media dynamics.

Upfront Thoughts - Things That Matter

Game of Thrones is over and summer is coming.

 

The May sweeps have ended and summer repeats and reality will once again take over the broadcast airwaves.  Many viewers will turn to cable, with its increasingly robust menu of original scripted series, as they do every year at this time.  They will also turn to streaming services such as Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime Video to watch full seasons of new and returning shows.

 

All cable networks, of course, do not air original scripted primetime programming during the summer.  Even the ones that do don’t do so all the time.  Nevertheless, there are now enough cable networks airing at least one or two original scripted series that viewers could watch cable for two or three hours every night in the summer and not have to watch any repeats.  Between May and September, there will be 8 returning or new first-run scripted series on the broadcast networks, compared to roughly 30 on ad-supported cable networks, 7 on premium cable, and more than 30 on streaming services (15 on Netflix).

 

Many households across the country are similar to mine in that we will watch little broadcast TV this summer.  Rather, I will be watching season 5 of Bosch and season 3 of Sneaky Pete on Amazon Prime, season 3 of Stranger Things and Designated Survivor on Netflix, season 3 of The Good Fight and season 2 of Star Trek Discovery on CBS All Access, as well as several returning ad-supported cable series, including AMC’s Fear the Walking Dead, Paramount’s Yellowstone, TNT’s Animal Kingdom and Claws, FX’s Legion, and USA’s Queen of the South.  There are also a number of series on various streaming services I will enjoy discovering.

 

Things That Matter and Things That Don’t

As the annual round of upfront events and presentations come to an end and the networks start promoting their new content throughout the summer, here are a few things that should matter to networks, media agencies, and advertisers.

 

The Most Loyal Program Viewers are the Biggest Commercial Avoiders

If you look at all primetime original scripted series on broadcast and ad-supported cable, most have between 25% and 50% of their reported adult 18-49 and 25-54 viewing played back via DVR (significantly higher if you look at time-shifted viewing beyond just seven days).  Since DVR penetration is roughly 60% among these key demos, this means that in DVR homes, between 40% and 80% of viewing in primetime is time-shifted.  Since roughly 75% of commercials are fast-forwarded during playback, that means for original scripted series in primetime, between 30 and 60% of all commercials among DVR owners are skipped.  That’s a lot.  The best research I’ve seen on the subject (and not just because I conducted the study) indicates that brand message recall is about three times greater for shows viewed live than those played back on DVRs.

 

The quandary, of course, is that DVR viewers are the most loyal viewers.  DVR playback is the essence of appointment viewing, and research has shown that people do less multi-tasking when playing back a show on DVR than when watching live TV.  So, a program’s most loyal viewers are also the biggest commercial avoiders.  The long-held belief among many industry experts and researchers that the most attentive program viewers are also the most attentive commercial viewers is no longer true (or rather, if true, only true for live viewers).  The key for advertisers, aside from in-program product integration, is continuing to innovate commercial messages in ways to get people to temporarily stop fast-forwarding.  The best I’ve seen are when commercial messages include in-character cast members of the show they appear in.

 

Pre-Season Buzz Doesn’t Matter…Unless it Does

I’ve been analyzing this subject for more than 20 years.  From the time that the major sources of pre-season buzz for a new series were syndicated news magazine shows, such as Entertainment Tonight and Access Hollywood, and print magazines, such as Entertainment Weekly, to the time when the big Comic Cons in San Diego and then New York joined in, to the time when social media became a significant source of chatter about new shows, one thing has been abundantly and consistently clear – there has been virtually no correlation between the amount of pre-season buzz a new TV series receives and whether the show actually succeeds (the success rate of the most buzzed about shows is virtually identical to that of all series in general). 

 

It is also true that many shows that have received little pre-season buzz have become long-running hits (NCIS and Grey’s Anatomy being just two examples that immediately come to mind).  More recently, NBC’s This is Us and ABC’s The Good Doctor became instant successes.  The former received a good deal of pre-season buzz, the latter did not.

 

Shows that are already on the air and receive a lot of positive social-media buzz can get a rating boost, expanding word-of-mouth, which has always been effective for current series.

 

In September, I will be releasing an updated analysis on this subject, looking at different types of pre-season buzz over the last 20 years, and what impact, if any, it had on new series success. 

 

 

 

Promotion Matters, Cross-Promotion Matters More

How many people heard of ABC’s excellent legal drama, For the People, or Whiskey Cavalier (another good mid-season drama), or Fox’s mutant hero drama, The Gifted?  Not many I would guess.  All have been canceled.  There are several shows each season that don’t draw the audiences they deserve, and are often axed before most people even know they exist.  I remain convinced that if new broadcast TV shows were cross-promoted on other broadcast networks, ratings would improve dramatically, and new shows would have a much better chance to find an audience.

 

There’s a reason why a show like CBS’s mid-season entry, The Code, will draw the typical CBS older audience but hardly anyone else.  Because the only broadcast network it can advertise on is CBS.  There’s also a reason why a series like Criminal Minds gets a much younger audience on Netflix than it does on CBS or ION.

 

Cable networks long ago realized that the best way to get viewer sampling for a new show was to promote it in similar programming on other networks (cable and broadcast).  But the broadcast networks still foolishly refuse to accept advertising from another broadcast network.  More than half the shows I regularly watch on cable, I found out about through promos on a different network.  I can’t say the same for anything I regularly watch on a broadcast network.  This is even more important for a mid-season show.  While new fall series are primarily promoted throughout the summer, mid-season series are promoted more on first-run episodes of other shows.

 

There’s another reason the broadcast networks should cross-promote one another’s series.  Cable networks tend to have programming that appeal to several different audiences – many cable networks have median ages that vary widely by program.  Since the broadcast networks air many more original scripted series, they tend to schedule programming that fits in with surrounding series, which limits expanding their audience profile.  For example, a show about serial killers, with a diverse young cast, should draw a reasonably young audience.  But because Criminal Minds is on CBS (with repeats on ION), it appeals to an older audience.  If it was promoted beyond CBS’s older audience, let’s say on FOX or CW, there’s no reason why younger viewers wouldn’t at least check it out.

 

Unfortunately, the broadcast networks continue to think as though it is still the 1980s, when their only real competition was other broadcast networks.  Today, they should see one another as allies.  When an Empire, This is Us, or The Good Doctor becomes a hit, it benefits all the broadcast networks because it reminds everyone that aside from the rare exception such as The Walking Dead, only broadcast networks are capable of reaching such a large audience with a single episode. 

 

It continues to boggle the mind that broadcast networks will happily accept ads from their real competitors, but not other broadcast networks.  No wonder streaming services are gaining tremendous ground each season.  And just watch, the broadcast networks will continue to promote Netflix, Hulu (despite now being fully owned by Disney), and Amazon Prime Video, but they will not do the same for CBS All Access or Disney +, simply because they have another network’s name in the title.  If CBS All Access changed its moniker to simply All Access, every broadcast network would probably accept their advertising dollars.

 

The broadcast networks need to understand that 30 years ago, the average broadcast rating was 10 times as large as the average of the top 10 cable networks.  Twenty years ago, it was 6 or 7 times as large.  Today, its only 3 - 4 times as large.   And the average rating of the top 10 cable networks has changed little over that time.  There’s no law that says broadcast network ratings need to decline every year.  But when they take ads for cable networks and streaming services, but not from one another, what do they expect?  The broadcast networks just spent upfront week selling us on the idea that they are the most effective advertising vehicles out there.  Maybe they should start taking their own advice.

 

Choosing to simply not advertising to the largest group of potential consumers, who are dead center of your target audience, is nothing less than promotional malpractice.

 

Rating Gains or Losses Should Matter, but Won’t

If you asked network executives whether they would rather have their average rating rise by 10% but slip in the standings, or lose 10% of their audience but move into 1^st place (for broadcast) or into the top 10 (for cable), they would all prefer to lose viewers and move up in the standings.  As the upfront process rewards rankings over ratings, and big data continues to highlight indexes over audiences, this is not likely to change.  And it will continue to be one of the reasons primetime broadcast audiences will continue to decline.

 

The upfront season creates an artificial demand for what is essentially an unlimited supply of rating points, which allows the networks to charge more each year regardless of whether average ratings go up or down. 

 

OpenAP and the Like Will Eventually, Maybe, Matter

I have an instinctive bias against sellers getting together to propose a “better way” of evaluating programming or advertising.  This type of thing is often designed to simply mask the fact that the traditional age/sex ratings are declining.  But I’m reserving judgment until I can evaluate exactly what they are doing.  There is so much data out there these days, and so much of it is bad, that having some top-notch researchers involved and having the data vetted and reported by a third party, may be a good idea.  Advertisers are rightfully concerned about digital ad fraud, dubious viewability metrics, etc.  It may not be widely accepted for a while, but you have to start somewhere if you want to change the world.

 

As more data becomes available from more sources, there will continue to be more differences among them.  Both buyers and sellers need to understand what all the data means, where it comes from, how it is derived, and whether it is projectable (much of the data aside from age/sex is not projectable).  Don’t just use data because it’s big, or because someone reports it, or aggregates it for you.  Don’t be lazy.  Do the work.

Does the Primetime Television Upfront Still Matter?

For American television viewers, the start of the new primetime television season is still four months away.  For insiders at media agencies, networks, and advertisers, however, the Upfront season is placing thoughts of September squarely into May.

 

Of course, the very idea of a fall TV season in today’s video world seems old fashioned.  The broadcast networks might still adhere to fall and mid-season schedules for debuting new shows, but their competitors do not.  Ad-supported cable networks premiere many new series when the broadcast nets are airing repeats and some limited-run series (mostly non-sweeps months and the summer).  Premium cable networks, such as HBO, Showtime, and Starz, air new shows throughout the year.  Streaming services, such as Netflix and Amazon Prime, release full seasons of new series whenever they happen to be ready.  CBS All Access does as well, although it releases new episodes on a weekly schedule, rather than all at once. 

 

In a television landscape of 10-episode cable series, and streaming services where you can binge-watch entire seasons, viewers don’t necessarily think in terms of TV seasons anymore.  Nevertheless, the broadcast networks still hold onto a schedule that starts in the fall.   

 

Throughout April and May, cable and broadcast networks give presentations to the ad industry in which they unveil their fall schedules and discuss their strategic direction for the next broadcast year.  This marks the start of the upfront season, when advertisers spend upward of $20 billion buying commercial time on national television programs scheduled to air during the next broadcast year (September-August).

 

Spending tons of money on new programming remains a risky proposition – only about 20% of all the new series that debuted during the past five years will still be on the air next season.

 

Developing and sustaining successful scripted broadcast series (without NCIS or Chicago in the title) is more difficult than ever.  Unless a show clicks right off the bat these days, it’s hard to build it into a hit.  Today, the network races are so close, replacing a couple of poor performers with mediocre ones can move a network up in the standings.  We are not likely to ever see another Cheers, which began as the lowest rated show of the week and ended its 11-year run in the top 10.  Or Seinfeld, a little-watched, mid-season sitcom that took three seasons to find an audience.  Or even The Big Bang Theory, which finished its first season in 68^th place and just completed its 12^th and final season as the longest running multi-camera comedy in television history.

 

Cable networks have traditionally had smaller presentations, which took place before the bigger and more glitzy network affairs – and many still do.  That is starting to change, however, as these large conglomerates are realizing it makes sense to combine their broadcast and cable properties into a single event:  for the past four years, NBCUniversal has included NBC, Bravo, E!, MSNBC, Oxygen, USA, and Telemundo in its annual presentation at Radio City, which traditionally leads off the broadcast upfront week; Disney hosted its first combined upfront presentation this year, with ABC, Freeform, and ESPN (which previously had its own upfront event), being joined by FX and National Geographic, which Disney acquired in its $71.3 billion acquisition of Fox assets:  this was Fox’s first presentation as an independent broadcast network; Turner (now part of WarnerMedia) always tried to play with the big boys – and now they really are one of the big boys.  Discovery (now better equipped since it merged with Scripps), A&E Networks, and MTV have often had bigger events (although before the broadcast upfront week).  No one should underestimate the effectiveness of this type of branding.  The upfront presentations and events will continue to evolve, but they are not likely to disappear anytime soon.

 

Does the Upfront Still Matter?

The broadcast networks unveiled their fall television schedules to the industry over four days of presentations during the week of May 13^th.  As I was sitting through the presentations, I realized why they are actually more important than ever (to the networks at least).

 

• Even though there is no question that linear TV is losing ground to other screens and streaming services, people of all ages (yes, even Millennials) still spend significantly more time with traditional television on an in-home TV set than with any other video source. Both the consumer and trade press cover these events, and it enables the networks to push back against the regular press narrative shouting about the demise of linear TV.

 

• Despite press headlines predicting an end to the upfronts, the networks will steadfastly resist any such idea. Only an upfront system enables networks to continually raise prices for declining ratings.  The upfront creates an artificial demand for what is essentially an unlimited supply of rating points.  Also keep in mind that 30 years ago, the average broadcast network rating was more than 10 times the average of the top 10 cable networks.  Twenty years ago it was 6 or 7 times larger.  Today it’s only 3 or 4 times larger.  The advantage broadcast once had over cable is not nearly what it used to be. 

 

• From an advertising standpoint, obtaining audience guarantees still makes the process seem worthwhile. But advertisers and agencies should understand that as average ratings continue to decline, individual program ratings become easier to predict.  It is far more likely that you will under-estimate a show’s performance than over-estimate it.

 

• The upfronts allow the networks’ corporate conglomerate owners to provide Wall Street with the confidence that they are financially healthy. It’s like a futures market.

 

• People like going to parties and taking picrtures with celebrities (and then telling their family and friends all about it, and posting pictures on social media).

 

In reality, however, the upfronts today only benefit the sellers, not the buyers.  Years ago, there really was a “must see TV” Thursday lineup on NBC, or an ABC Tuesday schedule or CBS Monday night that advertisers felt they needed to buy and would invariably move the marketplace to get first dibs.  That is no longer the case.

 

Here’s a brief recap of the broadcast upfronts.

 

Disney presented its first unified upfront, in a show of force and a reminder that they are everywhere and can reach everyone (about 275 million people per month across all platforms).  In addition to spending about 30 minutes talking about the ABC broadcast network (still the center of the Disney video universe), it spent 15 minutes on ESPN, 10 minutes on FX, 15 minutes on Nat Geo, 10 minutes on Freeform, and 5 minutes on ABC News.  They also mentioned buying out Comcast’s ownership interest in Hulu, and the upcoming Disney+ streaming service, but provided no details about their plans for either.  With so many properties to cover, the presentation was crisper flowed much more smoothly than I expected.

 

Disney touted having all the best brands in media:  ESPN, with the NFL, NBA, and college football, as well as ESPN Films, and its new partnership with Caesar’s Entertainment is the best place for sports;  FX is the boldest place for adults on ad-supported TV (this has been true for many years), Nat Geo is the #1 brand on Instagram and the new edition of Genius will feature Aretha Franklin;  Millennials now outnumber Boomers, and where better to reach them than Freeform, the only network to make its shows immediately available to stream, and, of course, ABC, the #1 broadcast network among women, which will continue to be its main focus.

 

Speaking about only having three new scripted series this fall, ABC bemoaned how tough it is to get viewers’ attention in a world of TV everywhere.  It remains difficult to have effective marketing campaigns on network schedules as ratings continue to decline.  Actually, I don’t remember if this was said at the actual upfront presentation or the pre-upfront press conference.  Either way, it’s a stunning admission given that I’ve been writing for more than five years that the broadcast networks’ stubborn refusal to cross-promote one another’s new shows (as cable nets have done for years) is the main reason some shows flop, particularly in mid-season, and one reason overall broadcast ratings continue to decline.  The broadcast networks continue to purposely not advertise their programs to the largest group of available viewers who are dead center in their target audiences.

 

CBS touted its strength and stability as America’s most watched network for 11 years in a row.  In its first upfront presentation of the post-Leslie Moonves era, CBS cited its involvement with the #seeher initiative, with one of the network’s top priorities being how it portrays women and people of color (the latter of which CBS has been justifiably criticized for the past several years).  Many of its second-year returning shows and virtually all of its new series have women or people of color in leading roles.

 

Acknowledging that “brands need to work harder in a sea of infinite choice,” CBS talked about its multiplatform options (which reach 300 million people per month), and that unlike others, it is not crawling into the OTT space, it is already there (with CBS All Access).  The network claimed to be the 7^th largest internet company in the world, with 175 million monthly users.

 

But content drives everything, and CBS’s future will continue to be driven by outstanding programming and storytelling – CBS ALL Access has passionate viewers, CBS programs are dominant in syndication, and 80 different series come out of CBS Television Studios.

 

CBS paid tribute to The Big Bang Theory, the longest running multi-camera comedy in TV history (which just aired its final episode after 12 highly successful seasons), mentioned that Madam Secretary will have one more 10-episode season, and that they have a name for its new CBS All Access Star Trek series about Captain Picard – it will be called, naturally, Star Trek Picard.

 

CBS will have the most new series come fall with five, and will have five additional time periods with shows either switching times or nights.  Yet the schedule still seems like they are playing it safe (which is not necessarily a bad thing for CBS).

 

Watching the Fox presentation was like being transported back to the early 1990s, when the fledgling Fox network was trying to compete with the Big 3, cable was little more than an annoyance to the broadcast networks, time-shifting and streaming weren’t yet things, and there was only one screen.

 

After Disney’s purchase of 21^st Century Fox assets, the big takeaway here was that Fox is starting over – they’re open for business, working with a wide array of studios, and is stronger than ever.  Claiming to still be the most daring and disruptive broadcast network, the presentation’s opening reel, which featured Married…With Children, The X-Files, 24, and Fringe, did remind me how innovative and cutting edge the network once was.

 

The network is fortunate to have the Super Bowl next season, and it sees its new Friday WWE Wrestling as a strong promotional vehicle for other programming (I see it more as an island that will have little impact on the rest of Fox’s schedule).  This will also be the last season of Empire.  Because of Thursday football and Friday wrestling, Fox will have just three series in the fall (several more in mid-season).

 

Fox will focus on expanding its animation lineup, led by The Simpsons, Family Guy, and Bob’s Burgers, over live comedy.  The new season of The Masked Singer will start following the Super Bowl, and a spinoff of its successful 911, titled, 9-1-1 Lone Star will debut following the NFC Championship Game.  I’ll reserve judgment for now on whether Fox will be able to reclaim its glory days any time soon, but the network has had a knack over the years for coming up with new hits just as you think they are poised to decline.

 

As usual, Comcast/NBC Universal started the week of upfront presentations, and as has been the case for the past few years, combined its network and cable properties into a single event.  These include NBC, USA, Syfy, Bravo, E!, and Telemundo (as well as its recent purchase of Sky).

 

The biggest news to come out of NBCU’s presentation is that its as yet unnamed streaming service won’t be available until mid-2020.  It will include original content and a “gigantic library of favorites.” NBCU also mentioned that as other companies are pushing advertisers out, they are bringing them in.  The new service will be free and ad-supported.  They also implied that The Office, which is reportedly Netflix’s most popular show, will be on the service.

 

Although talking about rapid globalization, a 4^th industrial revolution, and the future of streaming, the bulk of NBCU’S presentation focused on traditional linear television, and, of course, the Olympics.  The network highlighted a few new and returning series on USA and Syfy, as well as WWE Wrestling, E!’s Keeping Up With the Kardashians, and showed clips of Bravo’s unscripted series.  It also mentioned the strength of Telemundo, citing a study showing that half of U.S. Hispanics watch only Spanish language television.

 

NBC will only have three new series this fall, as The Voice continues to lead off two nights and its three Chicago series are all on one night.  The network will have the most stable schedule, as only 2½ of its 22 hours will have a different series than this season.

 

The CW presentation was short and sweet.  The network was quick to point out that it always had one of the most distinctive brands on television, has a younger audience than other broadcast networks, has been a digital network since 2012, was the first multiplatform network, and has free digital apps with no authentication required (and 60 million app downloads).

 

The network’s priorities are to increase its original programming (which stands at 70% of its schedule in 2019), and to “welcome all ethnicities and all orientations.”  Its latest foray into the DC universe will be Batwoman, which stars the first openly lesbian superhero (she joins Arrow, in its last season, The Flash, Supergirl, Black Lightning, and Legends of Tomorrow).

 

WarnerMedia (now owned by AT&T) touted Warner Media content and AT&T scale.  And to be sure, it has tons of ad-supported video content, with TBS, TNT, Tru, CNN, Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, and Turner Sports (not to mention HBO and DirecTV).  Whatever your target audience, they have something or a package of things to suit your needs.  Its massive portfolio now reaches 75% of Americans and has more than 1.2 billion followers across social media.  According to WarnerMedia, its entertainment channels, TBS, TNT, Tru, and Adult Swim, reach a combined 239 million unique viewers every month.

 

WarnerMedia believes in two sides of the business model – subscription and advertising.  Its upcoming streaming service (no name yet) will have an advertising component.

 

After spending years successfully branding TNT for drama and TBS for comedy, WarnerMedia wants more flexibility, and will be adding new dramas to TBS’s lineup.  They cited TNT movies as being stronger than those on FX, USA, or Freeform (I haven’t checked this claim).

 

Wanting its own piece of the Wrestling business, TNT will air something called AEW (All Elite Wrestling).  TNT’S drama, The Alienist, the highest rated new cable drama of 2018, won’t have its second season until 2020.

 

Adult Swim’s animated hit, Rick & Morty, will debut its long-awaited fourth season in November 2019.

 

Some Common Upfront Themes

While the past few years saw the networks bash streaming and the digital world, this year’s upfront presentations saw little of that as all the networks are now planning how to most effectively play in those arenas.

 

In their only real dig at other screens, all of the networks cited safe and advertiser-friendly environments (as a big advantage over the less controllable digital landscape).

 

Our unified company can reach everyone.  The claims - Disney reaches 275 million people per month across all platforms.  Its combined brands have 4 billion engagements on Facebook and Instagram (Nat Geo is the #1 brand on Instagram).  CBS platforms reach about 300 million people per month.  WarnerMedia’s combined portfolio reaches about 75% of all Americans each month across all platforms, and has 1.2 billion followers on social media.  Its entertainment channels, TBS, TNT, Tru, and Adult Swim reach a combined 239 million unique viewers per month.

 

Everyone is jumping into the stream.  CBS pointed out that they are already there with CBS All Access, which has around 3 million subscribers, and achieved critical acclaim for The Good Fight, Star Trek Discovery, and its new version of The Twilight Zone.  It will be expanding the Star Trek franchise with Star Trek Picard and other new series (which is sure to keep CBS All Access top of mind at the big annual San Diego and New York Comic Cons).  Disney did not mention its upcoming Disney+ service, but did talk about its just completed acquisition of Comcast’s 30% ownership stake in Hulu, giving Disney complete control of the streaming service.  While no details were forthcoming at the upfront presentation, we already know that Disney+ will include several new series from both the Marvel and Star Wars universes.  Some reports following the presentation indicated that Disney might provide Hulu free of charge to Disney+ subscribers.  Comcast/NBC Universal’s as yet unnamed streaming service won’t be available until mid-2020.  Its service will be free and ad-supported (as long as you subscribe to a cable, satellite, or telco bundle), containing original series and a giant library of archived content – and apparently will take back Netflix’s most viewed show, The Office.   WarnerMedia’s upcoming unnamed streaming service will have an advertising component and a massive amount of library content (haven’t heard about its plans for original series).

 

With more states legalizing sports betting, Disney (ESPN) and Fox are both getting a piece of the action – ESPN through a deal with Caesar’s Entertainament, and Fox through its own betting service creatively titled, Fox Bet.  Haven’t heard about plans in this area from CBS or NBCU, but they’ve got to be thinking about it.

 

Everyone’s talking about delivering more targeted and precise audience segments, but details are still hard to come by.  Fox, Viacom and NBCU have partnered on something called OpenAP (Turner was also involved, but dropped out when AT&T purchased Time Warner, and now is involved with AT&Ts Xandr).  Disney apparently has its own proprietary analytics platform.  There were virtually no insights from any of these at the upfront presentations, save for the call for moving beyond standard rating points – which, of course, makes sense since ratings continue to decline and the network’s need new ways to sell a shrinking product.  Delivery of results based on business outcomes sounds good, but standardized ways of measuring such impacts of advertising remains evasive.  I continue to have strong misgivings about any research developed and funded by a product’s sellers (even if they utilize a third party).  Good research should be developed independently by a party with no vested interest in the results and then vetted by both buyers and sellers.

 

It is fascinating that we’ve reached a point where you can sit through a week of network presentations and not hear once about the size of their actual ratings.

Young Media Person's Guide to Evaluating Pilots

This week the broadcast networks are announcing their primetime fall schedules for next season.  In the days that follow, insiders at advertisers and their agencies, as well as TV critics and media analysts like me, will get to see all the pilots for their new fall TV shows.  Predictions of hits and misses will commence soon thereafter.

 

In the 30 years that I’ve been analyzing TV programming, the idea of what makes a successful series has changed dramatically.  In the 1980s, a 30 share among households was the benchmark of success for a new broadcast network series (something that today would be a truly remarkable number).  During the 1990s, as cable began siphoning off broadcast viewers, a 20 share or a reasonably strong demographic performance (finishing first or second in its time period among adults 18-34 or 18-49) was considered successful.  Throughout the 2000s, as DVR, multimedia device and streaming penetration started growing, definitions of success became more nebulous – finishing first or second in a time period, holding a solid portion of its lead-in audience, performing well among a certain demographic segment, doing well relative to the network’s other programming, receiving a strong bump in time-shifted viewing, and being popular on social media, all contribute to whether a new show is perceived as successful.

 

What to look at when evaluating the success potential of a particular pilot, however, has not changed much.  But how long a new series is given to reach that potential has.  Long gone are the days when a Cheers can debut as the lowest rated show on television, but end its final season 11 years later in the top 10.  Or a Miami Vice can generate low ratings during its first season, and become a word-of-mouth hit over the summer.  Or a Seinfeld can air for three years in mid-season before earning enough viewers to make the fall schedule.  Or an Everybody Loves Raymond can start out with low ratings on Friday night, move to Monday, and become a major success.  Part of the reason is how close the network standings are these days.  In the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, one network was generally so far ahead or so far behind the pack, that giving a poor performer the network liked time to build an audience didn’t have much downside.  Today, however, replacing two or three weak performers with others that do only slightly better can move a network up in the standings.

 

While the actual quality of the pilot is obviously important where it’s placed on the schedule has traditionally been just as significant.  It is still a consideration, but much less so than in years past.  Scheduling a new show opposite a blockbuster hit such as E.R., CSI, or Grey’s Anatomy, for example, was almost guaranteed to fail.  A new show following Seinfeld or NCIS, on the other hand, was a good bet to draw a sizable audience.   But today’s network world is different, and significantly more splintered.  There is no NBC Thursday night “Must See TV” anymore, where a network can throw anything at 8:30 or 9:30 and get a solid rating.  There are no 40- or even 30-share programs or time periods anymore.  Having a strong lead-in, while still valuable, is not nearly as significant as it once was.  A good show can succeed anywhere, and a bad show can flop anywhere.

 

So being able to correctly evaluate a pilot’s success potential is more important than ever.  Here are some guidelines:

 

Shows make stars, stars don’t make shows.  The failed TV series with major stars attached are too numerous to list here.  In most cases, it’s the show that makes the star, not the other way around.  Hit shows, ranging from comedies such as, Cheers, Friends, Seinfeld, Everybody Loves Raymond, The Big Bang Theory, and Modern Family, to broadcast dramas such as, E.R., The X-Files, Lost, Grey’s Anatomy, Empire, This is Us, The Good Doctor, and A Million Little Things, to cable dramas such as, The Shield, The Closer, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Sons of Anarchy,  The Walking Dead, and Game of Thrones, were cast largely with actors who were not well known to the general public at the time.

 

Some stars, such as Tom Selleck (Blue Bloods) or James Spader (The Blacklist), can bring long-time fans to a new series (and usually appeal to an older audience).  But they are the exception.

 

Established stars (more commonly TV personalities) bring high viewer expectations, based on other popular roles, which are often hard to live up to.  This is why stars from long-running hit series have trouble immediately succeeding with another new show.  After Seinfeld, Julia Louis-Dreyfus had a failure in New Adventures of Old Christiine before finding major success in HBO’s Veep.  The same is true for Designated Survivor’s Keifer Sutherland, who had a failed series after his iconic 24 run (Touch), which lasted one season.  The CBS drama, Bull, starring Michael Weatherly (who left NCIS to star in the new show), is a notable exception.

 

Comedies should be funny because of the characters, not the plot.  Did some specific event happen in the pilot to make it funny?  Is it a romantic comedy where the two main characters meet in the pilot?  Is it a “fish out of water” comedy where the main character returns home to her small town after years of having a career in the big city?  Does some poor schlub somehow strike it rich or get some major promotion at work?  Does someone not ready for a family inherit his or her sister’s kids?  You get the idea.  By the second episode, these plot-driven comedy pilots often become substantially different shows.  So even if the pilot is hilarious, it provides little indication of whether it can be maintained on a weekly basis. 

 

A couple of years ago, I cited ABC’s comedy, The Mayor (which co-starred Lea Michele, who had become a star on Glee) as one of the best comedy pilots, but also pointed out that while the events that led up to an aspiring rap singer becoming mayor was both timely and funny, by episode two it would be a different show.  I thought its success would depend on whether they could maintain the comedy in this new situation week after week (they couldn’t).  I also thought The Good Place had similar potential, and they far exceeded my expectations.

 

Some of the most successful, long-running comedies on TV had pilots that I can’t recall at all.  A few that come to mind are, The Cosby Show, Golden Girls, Cheers, Roseanne, Home Improvement, 30 Rock, Modern Family, and The Big Bang Theory.  They were funny because the characters were funny and compatible with one another, not because of anything that happened in the pilot.  The casts had strong chemistry, and people wanted to see them interact week after week irrespective of any storylines or plot devices.

 

What will a drama’s third episode look like?  Is it a good one-time movie, or will it work as a weekly series?

 

Some of the things you look at to predict comedy success, also apply to dramas.  Are there specific events or guest stars in the pilot that drive the story but won’t exist by the second episode? 

 

Medical, police, or legal dramas can seem compelling based solely on the case covered in the pilot episode.  Or, the pilot could miss the mark, but the series gets better over time.  Of course, if the pilot misses the mark these days, it usually isn’t given enough time to get better.  We need to consider the potential strengths and charisma of the lead characters and ongoing themes of the series beyond the pilot’s script.  I pegged ABC’s The Good Doctor as one of the best medical drama pilots I had ever seen.  It was able to maintain the quality of the pilot, and is now one of the highest rated shows on television.  I also said ABC’s For the People was one of the best legal drama pilots I had ever seen.  Despite maintaining the quality from week-to-week it couldn’t find enough viewers and was just canceled.  But I was reasonably sure The Good Doctor would have broader appeal.

 

For procedural dramas, does the cast gel and are there enough humorous elements that people will want to tune in to slight variations of the same situation week after week.  These can be telling when you compare shows in the same genre – the differences between the excellent Criminal Minds and the failed Criminal Minds Beyond Borders, or the original CSI, and the short-lived CSI Cyber, are dramatic (and demonstrate the importance of good casting).  All of the NCIS’s, on the other hand, managed both the casting and the mixing of drama and humor quite well, and all are hits.

 

Dramas that focus almost exclusively on the characters’ work lives tend to appeal to an older audience.  Those that also focus on their personal (i.e., sex) lives tend to skew younger.

 

It typically takes three or four episodes before a drama settles in to its regular audience level.  CBS dramas tend to get high viewer sampling – its audience base is more network-loyal than most broadcast or cable networks and tend to check out any new procedural, so it sometimes takes a bit longer for CBS shows to hit their regular performance level.

 

Broadcast TV series based on movies generally don’t work.   There are a few reasons for this.  Successful movies bring high expectations, which are seldom met.  There are also generally lesser “stars” associated with the TV show than were in the movie.  Movies are typically designed as a single two-hour contained event, not as an ongoing series (unless it’s Marvel, DC, or one of the other action/sci-fi franchises out there).

 

Between 1985 and 2018, the broadcast networks aired 41 television series based on movies.  Only six lasted three seasons or more – In The Heat of the Night (1988-94), Clueless (1996-99), Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1997-2003), Friday Night Lights (2006-2011), Parenthood (2010-2015), and Nikita (2010-13).  That’s a 15% success rate, about half that of the average network new series. 

 

In 2016/17 and 2017/18, there were an unprecedented seven new series based on theatrical movies.  Only one, Lethal Weapon, was even moderately successful (and was just canceled – more because of on-set turmoil than low ratings).  Time After Time, The Exorcist, Frequency, Training Day, and Taken did not last long.  There were no series based on movies this season.

 

TV reboots typically don’t work – unless they do.   There have been many reboots and remakes of successful (and not so successful) TV shows over the years.  Both the positives and negatives are fairly obvious.  Reboots are pre-sold concepts that don’t require the same level of promotional weight to generate awareness.  They also tend to receive a fair amount of pre-season buzz.  At the very least, they tend to get viewer sampling, so if they’re good, they have a better than average chance to succeed.  On the down side, they tend to carry high expectations, which are often hard to meet. 

 

Netflix started the new trend of reboots with Fuller House and One Day at a Time.  The latter was canceled after two seasons, but is currently looking for another home.  CBS All Access reportedly wanted it, but Netflix won’t allow it to go to a competitive streaming service, insisting it can only go to a linear network. 

 

Popular shows that come back with the original casts can do quite well (see Dallas, The X-Files, and Roseanne).  Murphy Brown, on the other hand, didn’t perform as well and was canceled after a single season.  Will & Grace started out OK, but then declined (although NBC renewed it for some reason).  Part of the problem with these types of shows is that younger viewers are often unfamiliar with the series and older viewers, who liked the original are often disappointed with the new version.

 

Reboots with new casts (e.g., Bionic Woman, Ironside, Dragnet, Charlie’s Angels, Melrose Place, 90210, The Odd Couple,) usually can’t match the original and often don’t last long – although   there have been some notable exceptions).  Battlestar Galactica, for example, became iconic in its own right, far surpassing the impact of the original series.  Hawaii Five-0 and MacGyver are doing just fine.  Magnum PI is not as strong, but has been renewed (despite having virtually identical ratings to the canceled Murphy Brown).

 

So how do you know if a reboot with a new cast will work?  You don’t.  You need to evaluate them just as you would any other series in that genre, at the same time realizing that the pilot will probably get a larger viewer sampling than it otherwise might.

 

Pilots often look better in a conference room, online, or on DVD than they will in your regular viewing environment.   When I watch network pilots it is typically online or on DVDs the networks send me.  I watch them at my leisure, with no commercials and no distractions.  When the show finally airs on TV, of course, it will be following some other program, opposite some other programs, while I’m simultaneously doing some other activity.  Despite the high degree of DVR time-shifting, scheduling and the competitive landscape are still important to a new show’s success.

 

This is one of the major reasons to take what a network says about how well a pilot tested with a grain of salt.  They are most often tested in laboratory, not real-life settings.  Let’s always remember that Seinfeld was NBC’s worst testing comedy pilot ever.

 

Don’t buy the buzz.   I’m going to write a separate analysis in September about how much impact pre-season buzz has on whether or not a new series becomes successful.  That report will include the shows that are getting the most pre-season buzz this year. 

 

Much of the buzz these days comes from social media and comic-cons, and is often heavily skewed toward sci-fi series or shows with former sci-fi stars attached.

 

Most pre-season buzz has traditionally come from people who have not seen the pilot and don’t know if the show is actually any good (although today, the trailer is generally available online well before the show’s fall debut).  People who discuss new shows online are not necessarily going to watch them on television – particularly if the series is scheduled opposite one of their favorites.  This remains true even in today’s DVR, streaming video, time-shifted world.  Social media buzz often provides a good indication of whether a series is poised to grow or decline after it’s already on the air, but has little impact before the season begins.

 

Three years ago, This is Us was a significant exception.  It received a strong amount of positive pre-season buzz (and was one of the most viewed trailers online).  The chatter, however, was not primarily about the genre or any of its stars.  It was simply that it was a good show – well-written, diverse, and something you can watch with your whole family.  On the other hand, the following season’s drama hit, The Good Doctor, did not receive nearly as much pre-season buzz.  A future issue of The Sternberg Report will look specifically at new series that have been helped by pre-season buzz, and what, if anything, they have in common.