Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

The Ratings Thread (Part 45)


Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22-01-2013, 18:06
AlexiR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
True. Itv has had three returning hits: Downton abbey, whitechapel and Scott and Bailey as well as middling crime shows like Law and order and Inspector banks. Thats not many proper returning hit shows in the space of five years. Last year none of their new dramas rated well. BBC's Ben Stephenson in less time has found: Sherlock, Call the Midwife, Luther, Last Tango in Halifax, Death in Paradise, The Paradise, Silk which is not only more shows but a wider range of genres.
You're overlooking the depth of the problems ITV drama had though. It wasn't simply an inability to successfully launch new drama it was that the brand went through a years long process of being contaminated by a slew of terrible shows. The reason people speak of revival or renaissance of ITV drama is because most (admittedly not all) of their new drama content is now at least watchable and often times much better than that. With the obvious exception of Eternal Law most of ITV's drama content of the past couple of years has ranged from good to excellent and its from that platform that you can build sustainable and returnable drama.
AlexiR is offline  
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 22-01-2013, 18:06
Samthefootball
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 3,325
I'd be grateful for the ratings, seeing as anyone can access them - which has been the case since mid November.

But never mind, let's continue this tedious +1 argument which seemingly never will go away, instead of talking about the plethora of figures we have in front of us.
I agree. This +1 argument is getting stupid. Dancc has spent his time posting ratings for us when he could have been doing something else. Why can't we just be grateful having some ratings.

Thank you to you, Dancc and the other posters who post the ratings for us. At least i'm grateful.
Samthefootball is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:10
Dancc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northamptonshire
Posts: 43,787
I agree. This +1 argument is getting stupid. Dancc has spent his time posting ratings for us when he could have been doing something else. Why can't we just be grateful having some ratings.

Thank you to you, Dancc and the other posters who post the ratings for us. At least i'm grateful.
Cheers Sam. To be fair, it's mostly D.M.N. that does them anyway. Myself and one or two others try to step in when D.M.N. isn't around and it could be either that or no roundup at all. Hopefully me is preferable, even if some don't approve of my methods!
Dancc is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:12
wizzywick
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 14,625
I agree. This +1 argument is getting stupid. Dancc has spent his time posting ratings for us when he could have been doing something else. Why can't we just be grateful having some ratings.

Thank you to you, Dancc and the other posters who post the ratings for us. At least i'm grateful.
We are all grateful. That issue has never been disputed. The +1 argument may be tiresome, but whilst some insist it is right to lump +1 figures onto the main channels figures to inflate the main channel, there will be others who dispute this practice. Until the day arrives where ratings are listed differentially, then the argument will continue. After all, everyone who debates on these threads believe themselves to be right. No amount of agreeing/disagreeing will change that.

But, I agree. Those who do post ratings should be applauded. This would be a dull and pointless thread without them.
wizzywick is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:14
AlexiR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
Looking over to the US for a moment. Fox's new Monday night drama The Following (which starts on Sky Atlantic tonight I believe) has launched reasonably well. A 3.1 in the demo and just over 10 million total viewers. That's a huge improvement over the debut of The Mob Doctor in the same slot earlier this season but slightly down on where Alcatraz started last year. Nervous times ahead for Fox.

Also it turns out The Big Bang Theory repeats well pretty much wherever CBS put it. A 3.2 at 8:30 on Monday night. The CW's Sex in the City prequel The Carrie Diaries appears to be DOA (down to a 0.5 in week two). And NBC have to be over the moon with how well The Biggest Loser is holding up on Monday night even with Deception dying at 10PM.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...tle-up/166000/

And just because I think its worth mentioning ABC seem to be going out of their way to kill off both Revenge and Once Upon A Time on Sunday night. After bizarrely airing them against The Golden Globes (where they fell to season lows) they decided to air originals against the NFL Playoffs on Sunday night where again they fell to season/series lows.
AlexiR is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:16
AlexiR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
We are all grateful. That issue has never been disputed. The +1 argument may be tiresome, but whilst some insist it is right to lump +1 figures onto the main channels figures to inflate the main channel, there will be others who dispute this practice...
Rather than disputing the practice you could instead post the figures without +1 and thus solve the problem by making sure both sets of figures are posted.
AlexiR is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:20
KennyT
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NW London
Posts: 19,397
(puts tongue firmly in cheek...)

The only practical use for the ratings that a programme gets is whether they are sufficient for said programme to get renewed so I propose the following should be posted and analysed:

For BBC shows, the consolidated figures (better yet, the live+7 numbers!).
For commercial channels, the average of the ad breaks (incl +1), possibly split out by demo.

/tongue

K
KennyT is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:23
wizzywick
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 14,625
Rather than disputing the practice you could instead post the figures without +1 and thus solve the problem by making sure both sets of figures are posted.
So could anyone else.

I am not complaining about how those who post figures do so. I am commenting on the "what is your problem with +1 being added" comments. Those who like this and those who don't. Both sides are right, at least in their opinion.
wizzywick is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:25
cylon6
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,271
All commercial channels are using +1 and to avoid all of the mindnumbingly tedious back and forth conversations like "Pointless beat The Chase/The Chase beat Pointless with +1" we should just include all the data where possible and let others draw conclusions.

It's not easy to find all the ratings and list them separately. Dancc, DMN, Hassan etc do it because they want to not because they have to so it wouldn't hurt to say thank you every now and again.
cylon6 is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:28
davey_wavey
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 22,221
Excellent ratings for Hollyoaks and Coronation Street last night. Hollyoaks is back on form now (and has been for many months) so I hope the show is able to keep up momentum and keep building its figures.
davey_wavey is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:32
AlexiR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
On the subject of Monday nights figures here in the UK.

Another mostly strong night for BBC1. Obviously the noticeable story there is the seeming stupidity of having Bake-Off clash with Miranda. A move made more stupid by the fact that it could seemingly have been avoid by either delaying Bake-Off for a few weeks (do we really need a comic relief special this early in the year?) or just scheduling it at 8PM. That half hour junction was an odd place to put it.

Sticking with BBC1 for a moment Blandings doing surprisingly well with a late night repeat.

On ITV Coronation Street produced the goods and Lewis continues to hold its own at 9PM. I know it hasn't been universally popular but the move to split this run into one hour two-parters has worked very well for them. I wonder how well it might have worked if they'd planned it ahead of time and the episodes were most obviously structured as hour longs. Might be something to look into if they get future runs.

So could anyone else.

I am not complaining about how those who post figures do so. I am commenting on the "what is your problem with +1 being added" comments. Those who like this and those who don't. Both sides are right, at least in their opinion.
And my point would be that its an incredibly tedious debate that just goes around in an endless circle. If someone doesn't like the numbers that have been posted because they do or don't include +1 they're perfectly capable of posting the numbers including or excluding +1 themselves rather than once again entering into (or encouraging) a tedious circular debate that goes nowhere and resolves nothing.

Lets all move on with our lives and stop getting hung up on channel x beat channel y narratives which appears to be all this stupid +1 debate is actually about.
AlexiR is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:37
Brekkie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cymru
Posts: 12,576
Happy Birthday, Brekkie!

Just spotted your name on the index page.
Thanks - it's a +1 of my very own.

Have we broken the record for earliest +1 argument in a new thread?
Brekkie is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:43
GeorgeS
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 17,670
If someone doesn't like the numbers that have been posted because they do or don't include +1 they're perfectly capable of posting the numbers including or excluding +1 themselves rather than once again entering into (or encouraging) a tedious circular debate that goes nowhere and resolves nothing.
if you put Robbie to work doing something useful he will have less time to complain
GeorgeS is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 18:50
wizzywick
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 14,625
Lets all move on with our lives and stop getting hung up on channel x beat channel y narratives which appears to be all this stupid +1 debate is actually about.

My life is perfectly fine! And, ratings in general are competitively discussed. Otherwise what's the point? I won't go into why +1 figures are debated vigorously as everyone by now knows the arguments from both sides. But if one channel didn't win over another channel then these ratings threads would be very tedious and we'd still be on part 1.
wizzywick is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:04
AlexiR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
My life is perfectly fine! And, ratings in general are competitively discussed. Otherwise what's the point? I won't go into why +1 figures are debated vigorously as everyone by now knows the arguments from both sides. But if one channel didn't win over another channel then these ratings threads would be very tedious and we'd still be on part 1.
I'm not sure that's an entirely bad thing. Although I don't completely agree with the assessment either. Obviously there's always some degree of appeal to the BBC1 beat ITV (or vice versa) line of analysis but it reaches extreme and often times stupid levels. In the grand scheme of things its fairly meaningless thing for any show to win their timeslot. There are many more valuable (and interesting) analysis points to consider beyond which channel won the night or slot.

If we return to Sunday night's figures for a moment. It is for example meaningless whether Ripper Street or Mr Selfridge 'won' the 9PM slot. It just does not matter especially not on a night when Mr Selfridge lost in the region of a million viewers week-on-week and Ripper Street was up in the region of 400k week-on-week. Yet despite this some posters here got hung up on a debate about which show won the slot and whether +1 should be included and/or adverts stripped out to get the 'right winner'. Its such a meaningless debate when there are so many other data points to look at. The general state of drama on either channel for example or the ratings trend for both shows. This idea that Mr Selfridge's fate depends upon beating Ripper Street head-to-head just makes no sense.
AlexiR is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:08
Dancc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northamptonshire
Posts: 43,787
I'm not sure that's an entirely bad thing. Although I don't completely agree with the assessment either. Obviously there's always some degree of appeal to the BBC1 beat ITV (or vice versa) line of analysis but it reaches extreme and often times stupid levels. In the grand scheme of things its fairly meaningless thing for any show to win their timeslot. There are many more valuable (and interesting) analysis points to consider beyond which channel won the night or slot.

If we return to Sunday night's figures for a moment. It is for example meaningless whether Ripper Street or Mr Selfridge 'won' the 9PM slot. It just does not matter especially not on a night when Mr Selfridge lost in the region of a million viewers week-on-week and Ripper Street was up in the region of 400k week-on-week. Yet despite this some posters here got hung up on a debate about which show won the slot and whether +1 should be included and/or adverts stripped out to get the 'right winner'. Its such a meaningless debate when there are so many other data points to look at. The general state of drama on either channel for example or the ratings trend for both shows. This idea that Mr Selfridge's fate depends upon beating Ripper Street head-to-head just makes no sense.
Yeah, very well put. This is so true.
Dancc is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:08
RobbieSykes123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,318
Out of interest where have the ratings all been publicly available since November? I must have missed that, I assumed those who post full day round ups were getting them through "sources".
RobbieSykes123 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:13
C14E
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 29,756
As I've said before, the biggest problem is that "ratings" aren't designed to show whether BBC1 "beat" ITV1. Sometimes they're not even playing the same game! Whatever way you look at them, someone is going to be unfairly represented.
C14E is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:19
jda135
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 785
deleted
jda135 is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:29
jda135
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 785
The snow certainly gave Channel 4's daytime a boost. Deal or No Deal over 1.2m, Countdown and Face the Clock over 500k and The Simpsons at 1.8m.

Primetime took a bit of a hammering. Embarrassing Fat Bodies and What Happens in Kavos around 1.2/1.3m, but Dispatches scored 1.91m. Massive number, which will revise up to 2m in the officials.
jda135 is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:33
Steve Williams
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,411
You're overlooking the depth of the problems ITV drama had though. It wasn't simply an inability to successfully launch new drama it was that the brand went through a years long process of being contaminated by a slew of terrible shows. The reason people speak of revival or renaissance of ITV drama is because most (admittedly not all) of their new drama content is now at least watchable and often times much better than that. With the obvious exception of Eternal Law most of ITV's drama content of the past couple of years has ranged from good to excellent and its from that platform that you can build sustainable and returnable drama.
Hmm, I dunno. I thought The Town was a terrible disaster for ITV because it got critical acclaim and had some big stars and it got appalling ratings, and the sad thing is that it seems viewers just don't want to check out a new ITV drama. It reminds me of what happened with comedy, in Mark Lewisohn's Radio Times Comedy Guide there's an entry for Blind Men, a rather dull ITV sitcom from 1997, which points out that the first episode only got 5.7 million viewers, which I recall at the time was considered absolutely awful, and Lewisohn points out that the fact so few people turned in for the first episode illustrated the lack of faith the public had in ITV comedy.

I wonder if that's now the case for ITV drama, people just aren't tuning in for first episodes as they assume they won't be much good. Because people do still seem to be tuning into new BBC1 drama.

Certainly I can remember a time when ITV dominated drama and there were points when they had drama at 9pm seven days a week, to the extent the ITC even said there was probably too much of it at the expense of other genres. ITV argued that the range and popularity of ITV drama justified it and certainly they were often adventurous in those days - Cracker, Band of Gold, they were 9pm shows and hugely innovative and challenging for the time. Obviously those were the days when there was more of a captive audience but they were hugely successful shows even by the standard of the time.

The one thing ITV seriously need, and they've failed to come up with, is the kind of long-runing series they used to have like Peak Practice that can run for thirteen weeks a year every year. All of their big shows now seem to be star vehicles so you're inevitably at the whim of the stars as to when you can do them. I've surprised they still appear not to have found anything to replace The Bill. I guess there's Law and Order but that's about it. It can be a bit cynical coming up with these ensemble pieces but if they do it right they have incredible value. I mean Peak Practice went through about a hundred cast changes and was still doing alright when they axed it (though that's not always the case, Soldier Soldier completely died when the big names went).

ITV drama was in a bit of a poor state five years ago but you still had the likes of Lewis, Frost and so on, plus Heartbeat and The Bill as bankers in the schedule.

Another mostly strong night for BBC1. Obviously the noticeable story there is the seeming stupidity of having Bake-Off clash with Miranda. A move made more stupid by the fact that it could seemingly have been avoid by either delaying Bake-Off for a few weeks (do we really need a comic relief special this early in the year?) or just scheduling it at 8PM. That half hour junction was an odd place to put it.
But at 8pm you were going up against EastEnders and I'm sure the Beeb would be happier for Miranda to take that hit because they can repeat Miranda a million times. I think the Comic Relief aspect is a non-issue, it is just Celebrity Bake Off and if they have to tie it in with Comic Relief, so what? People will watch it because it's Bake Off.
Steve Williams is online now  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:34
SamuelW
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 7,507
Is it true BBC has pulled secret service from schedules from 2 Saturdays time?
SamuelW is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:35
Servalan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,100
You're overlooking the depth of the problems ITV drama had though. It wasn't simply an inability to successfully launch new drama it was that the brand went through a years long process of being contaminated by a slew of terrible shows. The reason people speak of revival or renaissance of ITV drama is because most (admittedly not all) of their new drama content is now at least watchable and often times much better than that. With the obvious exception of Eternal Law most of ITV's drama content of the past couple of years has ranged from good to excellent and its from that platform that you can build sustainable and returnable drama.
Obviously it's subjective if you think that ITV's recent drama content 'has ranged from good to excellent' - but viewers clearly don't agree with you. Monroe, Homefront and The Town are three titles that have not only failed to capture significant audiences but also signal that someone at ITV has been taking their eye off the ball and is out of touch with what will engage with its core viewers.

The wider problem ITV's drama has is with its place within the channel as a whole. Both Downton Abbey and Scott & Bailey were launched off the back of Simon Cowell shows - and, to the schedulers' credit, with great success. But ITV has put so much faith in Cowell and the risks of the strategy were all too apparent last autumn.

What the channel needs is to be able to pull off the kind of trick Call The Midwife did last year - an unknown title up against two previously solid ratings bankers and coming out on top. I would love to see it be able to do this - and with something that doesn't just look like a clone of another show. Hopefully the new boss will achieve that - the only question is who that will be ... the person they need is Julie Gardner (ex-BBC Wales, now in the US) - but would they persuade her away from the States?
Servalan is offline  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:36
Steve Williams
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,411
Is it true BBC has pulled secret service from schedules from 2 Saturdays time?
Well, it's the Six Nations, which run past six o'clock, so presumably this is the ideal opportunity for the Beeb to pretend there's no room for it and quietly let it disappear.
Steve Williams is online now  
Old 22-01-2013, 19:41
Newcastle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,472
I wonder if that's now the case for ITV drama, people just aren't tuning in for first episodes as they assume they won't be much good. Because people do still seem to be tuning into new BBC1 drama.
.
Keeping it more current. 16 days ago. Mr Selfridge. 9.4m.
Newcastle is offline  
 
Closed Thread



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:34.