I really don't see the point in discussing some hypothetical casting decision (which I really doubt would happen) could possibly affect ratings. Why not deal in the here and now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do-wDPoC6GM
17m38s

K

The way people watch television - or programmes - is under going a huge shift, though.

I watch very little at the time it is actually broadcast and there is nothing I would call (for me) 'appointment TV'. As long as I've watched Dr Who sometime between when it is on and going to work on Monday, that's good enough There's no need to sit down and watch it at the time someone in BBC Towers says I should.

My first thought when the schedules come out isn't 'what time is it on' 'it's what does it clash with on the planner and how I can jiggle stuff round'

We won't get the final consolidated figure for episode 1 of this series until Monday. Until then we can't be sure that the timeshift will be big enough to make up for any viewers lost in the overnights. And if it's down, it can only be a negative.

Doctor Who's ratings performance shouldn't be immune from criticism. After all, it gets more coverage in the media than pretty much any other show on TV outside of soaps and The X Factor, and in this massive year for the BBC, if anything more was expected from it.

Timeshift, timeshift timeshift. Ad nauseum. But WHY is Doctor Who no longer regarded as appointment TV?

And, how many people watching timeshift are people who are rewatching a recording? And why do those who would watch it out of habit now no longer bother and watch later on? It's not because Who fans are more sophisticated. It is an enigma because it doesn't affect other shows quite in the same way. Therefore it is no longer appointment TV when it used to be. I am aware that viewing habits have changed/are changing. But, considering virtually every single show on TV is watched as broadcast bar a couple, you can't particularly complain about people who are genuinely, and rightly questioning the fact that people no longer want to watch Doctor Who as it is broadcast.

Now if you would like to review what Moffat actually said rather than what you think he said or what you wanted him to say:


http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/do...r-someday.html

So it's not his wish at all. Just some speculation addressing rumours that a woman might take over.

Alex wanted to know why "people" weren't applying the same criteria to NT as they were to DW, those were the points I was replying to, not the effect of some hypothetical recasting.

K

Because there are many sides to an argument. It is something I, as an individual, have every right to address. Tennant was the Doctor at the time timeshift figures were starting to boom. Sky+ and Freeview+ had launched and people were getting used to watching things in a different way. But, Tennant still had enough people wanting to watch him as the Doctor at the time of broadcast. Whether it was the way DW stories were written to appeal to a more universal audience is certainly one aspect to consider. Moffat is certainly more devisive amongst casual fans and it is the casual fans that will ultimately decide the long term future of the show.

Doctor Who is appointment TV, you just get to chose the best appointment for you and your family.

Ah, now here is a sensible question at last. Well done. We can only hypothesise, but since people only seem to be delaying watching, rather than not watching altogether, it could be any of several reasons. People are fed up with timeslots changing? People have got out of the habit of watching live, and now prefer iPlayer? Parents prefer to view the episode first before allowing their children to watch? It could be all sorts of reasons, I don't know. But what it DOESN'T suggest is that people have stopped watching altogether.


Now, as far as I'm aware, BARB would strip out 'second-time' watchers. Anyone know for sure?


As I said above, lots of reasons, and it's a genuinely interesting phenomenon. But the one thing I DON'T think it suggests is that people are losing interest altogether. If that were the case, we'd see fewer timeshifters, not more.

Personally, I do think that a substantial portion of the DW timeshift is down to repeat viewing. There have been comments such as "Murray Gold's music drowns out the dialogue" and "Matt Smith talks too fast" so some porportion of fans of the show probably do take to watching again in an effort to catch a piece of dialogue that they missed first time around. It's also a fact that kids can watch something a number of times without getting bored. Whether these "repeat viewers" are of less worth to the BBC is an interesting discussion point!

K

Trickytree will know for sure. I thought they were counted in the average but not for the reach (but I'm prepared to be corrected on that!)

K

This is a good question. Moffat's plots? Most of the fan base will trot out scheduling excuses.

Because it doesn't have to be.

I'm old enough to remember having to be first on the Radio Times to circle what you wanted to watch - and even then the grown ups had the final say and you had to be sat ready for the start of a programme else you'd missed it.

Younger, upmarket, tech savvy audience. And it's sci-fi. And if you want to watch watch a decent amount of sci-fi you need pay TV. Hence the vast majority of Doctor Who timeshifters have pay TV.

No doubt pay TV viewers who watch Doctor Who and New Tricks timeshift them both, but as New Tricks skews old it's bound to be less popular in pay homes where PVRs are the norm and not the exception.

It is to me, an interpretation that he is throwing it out as an idea to gauge a response. This suggests that he is considering casting a woman. Otherwise, why say it. If he didn't want to cast a woman he should have said "While I'm at the helm I won't cast a woman".

No disrespect Mossy, but you were one of the few who ridiculed and shouted down everyone who suggested that we would only get a few episodes this year and the rest next year, constantly saying that we had misinterpreted what Danny Cohen had said at last years Edinburgh Festival. But it appears that our interpretations were right and yours wasn't. So, I think I will continue to interpret from his statement on female Doctors the way I choose to. No offence intended.

And a number of Moffat-haters might blame his plots.

Whilst a number of Tennant fans will blame Matt Smith

With a number of RTD fans blaming anyone

And a number of old-Who fans blaming Nu-Who.

well, I think that your interpretation is not only a very liberal one, it just might be a skewed one.


Sorry, I might have questioned it, I might have put forward my interpretation of it based upon the transcripts, but to say that I shouted down and ridiculed everyone is not only very wide of the mark indeed, it is disrespectful and does you a disservice (whilst having nothing to do with the ratings discussion anyway).

Here's a quote from Steven Moffat from Doctor Who Magazine, when asked if he would ever cast a woman as the Doctor:

"Well, it could happen one day, but I would worry that you would no longer believe that it was the same person. Cos that’s a big one. If a man changes his shape and appearance, I could believe it’s still him. I think the critical thing about regeneration – the thing you can’t ever lose sight of – is not simply establishing a new Doctor, it’s that you’re saying ‘this man is definitely the same guy you’ve been following’, really, absolutely, still him. I wonder if making him female might push it? Maybe someone will come along who’s much more up-to-date and modern than me, and it could work. But I would worry that you might not believe. Given that the science of regeneration is nonsense, I don’t think there’s any scientific reason he couldn’t do it, but it’s a problem of narrative. Would you actually think it was still him/her? Would you actually think ‘that’s still William Hartnell’? At this moment, I do believe that the character we’re looking at is the same one William Hartnell played. All right, he’s got younger and he’s in a new body. But the Doctor is quite blokey in certain respects. There are certain aspects of him that are quite male – his inability to settle down, his restlessness, his desire to avoid emotion and tinker with his engine – which all feel to me to be quite male. But, someone else may one day come along and say, that’s a rule, let’s break it."

The fact he says 'someone else' may do that 'one day' doesn't suggest to me that he's considering doing it himself any time soon, and he seems pretty struck on the idea that the Doctor is 'blokey' and that the audience wouldn't buy that it was the same person if he turned into a woman.

But this all seems pretty irrelevant to current ratings discussions to me.

Ok you might not have ridiculed and I apologise for suggesting this, but you were certainly adament that you were totally right! But yes, we'll leave it there and concentrate on ratings.

Sdl ynt!

819k (3.4%)

perhaps it will timeshift well

K

Any chance of a seperate Dr Who thread?

Thanks for posting this. Mossy, I'm sorry. Credit where it's due, you are right this time. So, a badly edited DS article was totally misleading. And, yes, I am happy to leave it there and move on to continue discussing ratings.

I'm Morph, but no worries. Group hug?

OK, apology gratefully accepted (even if I still think that you have sort of misquoted me on the Danny Cohen thing, but never mind).