|
||||||||
The Mirror reports on "drastic ratings slide" |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Wilderness
Posts: 13,088
|
The Mirror reports on "drastic ratings slide"
Quote:
Fans of the show want wholesale changes with some calling for writer Steven Moffatt to be sacked over his baffling, adult plots.
Quote:
“Moffatt seems hellbent on killing off Who,” while another wrote: “Used to enjoy watching with my kids, now it is on far too late and is *complicated and *boring. Bring back the monsters!”
Quote:
Fan sites are awash with criticisms. Some claim a lack of chemistry between Time Lord Peter Capaldi, 56, and companion Jenna Coleman, 28, while others call for the return of the Daleks and Cybermen.
Well personally, I agree. It has been far too long since the Daleks and the Cybermen last appeared in the show. Moffatt needs to get it sorted innit. http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/d...k-time-4914953 |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,076
|
Bangs head repeatedly on the table.
To quote Moriarty - I love newspapers, fairy tales and pretty grim ones too |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: South East England
Posts: 114
|
It's only January 3rd and already The Mirror are fantasizing about a ratings crisis for Doctor Who. Outstanding work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,708
|
Said on another thread that HBO in America aren't reporting overnights anymore, because they don't matter in the slightest in 2015.
I really can't wait for the beeb to follow suit. NB- I really can't imagine anyone bar Terry Nation's estate really thinks the Daleks aren't featured enough. Maybe that is who they asked! |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,355
|
I never trust an article which quotes 'a source'. There's not really much in the way of facts in the article is there, more a load of opinion squashed together. No substance to it whatsoever so no reason to believe it either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,741
|
Jesus, what a dreadful article. How on earth does speculative garbage like this get published as fact?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Wilderness
Posts: 13,088
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London or Valencia
Posts: 5,733
|
You're spoilt for choice on where to begin tearing apart that article. Seriously, someone was paid to write that whilst I sit here unemployed?!
They can't even spell Moffat's name correctly, for starters. They criticise the chemistry between Capaldi and Coleman, which outside of anyone's personal opinion, has actually been not only one of the biggest strengths of Series 8, but arguably the most successful and well received pairing since Tennant and Tate back in Series 4. They suggest fans want to see the return of the Daleks and the Cybermen. They seem to have skipped over the fact the Cybermen had a key role in the Series 8 finale episodes - just an episode before last, and only a couple of months ago. The Daleks have also appeared in this series, whilst also appearing in three out of four episodes between the 50th Anniversary special and Into the Dalek - three Dalek-featured episodes in one year, and as many Cybermen stories as well. They seem to think it's a big deal to report a decline from 8 million to 7 million viewers between Series 7 and Series 8, despite the fact those figures are inaccurate anyway. And they're so determined to prove an already defeated point that they compare those ratings to "Eccleston's debut episode in 2005" which managed over 10 million - as if that was a typical viewership back in 2005, and as if it's fair grounds for some kind of comparison. This isn't even trying to defend a show I really enjoy. This is just me able to pick the most upfront, ridiculous holes in a poorly written article. If they employ people to write like this about a TV show, I dread to think what inaccuracies they report about actually important news stories. These newspaper writers deserve the sack, if we can't just get rid of the dreaded redtops altogether. |
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,126
|
Quote:
Jesus, what a dreadful article. How on earth does speculative garbage like this get published as fact?
The fact they can't spell Moffat correctly is worrying in itself!!! Why they are so anti Who is beyond me, its as if they are dropping a grenade and waiting for the aftermath that follows. And this after the latest article ref Doctor Who being the 6th most DVR'd show in the US and increased its ratings by 88%, |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,355
|
Quote:
I do wonder why The Sun & Mirror are allowed to be published full stop tbh.
The fact they can't spell Moffat correctly is worrying in itself!!! Why they are so anti Who is beyond me, its as if they are dropping a grenade and waiting for the aftermath that follows. And this after the latest article ref Doctor Who being the 6th most DVR'd show in the US and increased its ratings by 88%, |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,111
|
Does anyone remember the Prime Ministerial debates, back before the last general election? Stick with me, there is a point to this!
I remember the first debate ended with Cameron being widely reported for how bad he came across. Roll around the second debate and he was no better. But I remember, the following day, seeing a copy of The Sun at the newsagents with the headline "The Cam-Back Kid," with a subheading saying how Cameron knocked it out of the park in the second debate. I watched that debate. He didn't. He got consistently ripped to shreds by Nick Clegg, in particular. I couldn't believe they'd print such an obvious falsehood for a front page headline. Even if he were better than the first debate, to try and claim he knocked it out the park was a bare faced lie. I brought it up with a friend later that day and he said it was simple, really. They know the people who read their paper won't have actually watched the debate, so they can say what they like and their readers will just believe it. So back to this article. The Mirror is no better. They know they can publish tripe like this because they know their readership will never check their facts. They'll just accept that if they say it, it must be true. It is why I despise most newspapers. They're not interested in printing news, they're only interested in pushing their own agenda or simply generating sales. Truth is of little value to them. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,613
|
Totally agree with the article. Moffat really does need to go full stop as the majority of the episodes this past series including the Christmas special were attrocious. Hopefully it will return to the style of RTD which was so much better. The AI figures prove my point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 3,679
|
still waiting for the marco polo episodes recorded on 8mm film that the mirror promised in 2013,that paper now is even worse than the S*n
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Wilderness
Posts: 13,088
|
Quote:
Totally agree with the article. Moffat really does need to go full stop as the majority of the episodes this past series including the Christmas special were attrocious. Hopefully it will return to the style of RTD which was so much better. The AI figures prove my point.
That's a "fact" that The Mirror could publish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Essex
Posts: 8,406
|
I thought Season 8 was much more back-on-track after several years of messy, complicated storylines (poor Matt Smith!)
Season 8 was straight forward episodic adventures with a slow-burn link that revealed itself in the finale. It was much more like the RTD way of doing things, and I think it worked. The only part of the Mirror story I agree with is the comment "now it is on far too late" which is correct. Hopefully it will return to a more reasonable time of evening with season 9. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 507
|
"Doctor Who ratings crisis enters tenth year, 'sky still falling' say sources."
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 10,236
|
Interesting poll results. It seems that slightly more people agree that Doctor Who has lost its way (55%).
[Probably says more about Mirror readers than the general public] Anyway, what (another) pointless non-story filled with bullshit and downright lies. Doesn't The Mirror have anything else to write about such as actual news? Anyway, it never ceases to amaze me how ridiculous some of the criticisms are: on one side we have people whingeing about how silly and childish Doctor Who is and how they wish it was moved to CBBC so they don't have to look at it when they're watching high class entertainment such as Tumble on a Saturday evening... then on the other side we have people complaining about how it's too complicated, grown up and "edgy" (whatever that means) and how they wish it would "return" to simplistic plots involving simplistic monsters and baddies like a CBeebies show. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,643
|
I'm amazed to read such denial.
And I'm not going to elaborate on that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
|
Quote:
I'm amazed to read such denial.
And I'm not going to elaborate on that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: sutton, surrey
Posts: 7,510
|
Coronation street and east enders also have had ratings dropped buy that is because of years and years of multi channels. Catch up. On demand. +1 channels. Not to mention changes in social behaviour.
If anything doctor who has hardly had any decline in 9 years since being on. Considering the start time changes every single week. It's hardly surprising. But from an average of 9 million to 7 million in 9 years I think is brilliant performance. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
|
Quote:
Coronation street and east enders also have had ratings dropped buy that is because of years and years of multi channels. Catch up. On demand. +1 channels. Not to mention changes in social behaviour.
If anything doctor who has hardly had any decline in 9 years since being on. Considering the start time changes every single week. It's hardly surprising. But from an average of 9 million to 7 million in 9 years I think is brilliant performance. Sorry. Blame Fry and Laurie... ![]() Edit: You didn't mention Series averages did you. Whoops. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Wilderness
Posts: 13,088
|
Nigel Pauley's source doesn't stop there! Quote:
"Bringing Top of the Pops back has been discussed at the highest level. There is a definite feeling there is a place for it in our schedules.” Executives are thought to be considering more frequent specials or even monthly catch-ups to see how they go down with viewers. Doctor Who: 6.34mThe hour-long Christmas Day and New Year’s Eve shows, hosted by Fearne Cotton and Reggie Yates, attracted ratings of just a million less than Doctor Who .. ... .... Top of The Pops Christmas: 3.01m Top of The Pops New Year: 2.26m Apparently we're adding ratings together now. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,126
|
Quote:
Nigel Pauley's source doesn't stop there!
Doctor Who: 6.34m .. ... .... Top of The Pops Christmas: 3.01m Top of The Pops New Year: 2.26m Apparently we're adding ratings together now. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,076
|
There is a serious point about all this, how can a newspaper that many people will read and assume is true because its printed in something that is there to tell them news be allowed to blatantly give a false impression, use made up figures and tell lies, where is the accountability, the BBC needs to stand up for itself and challenge the Mirror on this and hopefully get an apology in the paper and maybe then they will think twice before printing garbage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 3,703
|
Quote:
There is a serious point about all this, how can a newspaper that many people will read and assume is true because its printed in something that is there to tell them news be allowed to blatantly give a false impression, use made up figures and tell lies, where is the accountability, the BBC needs to stand up for itself and challenge the Mirror on this and hopefully get an apology in the paper and maybe then they will think twice before printing garbage.
It's a pathetic rag of a 'newspaper', beyond contempt, full of lies and twisted half-truths printed only to provoke knee-jerk reactions. Don't give the a***holes who work there the satisfaction of a response. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:09.




