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

Bangs head repeatedly on the table.

To quote Moriarty - I love newspapers, fairy tales and pretty grim ones too

It's only January 3rd and already The Mirror are fantasizing about a ratings crisis for Doctor Who. Outstanding work.

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!

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.

Jesus, what a dreadful article. How on earth does speculative garbage like this get published as fact?

Kasterborous post

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.

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%,

Because papers like to have shocking stories, so taking a show which most see as popular and trying to make out it suddenly isn't is shocking whether actually true or not. If it had really gone so unpopular in the mainstream, news about it wouldn't be noteworthy and they wouldn't even be writing the article in the first place

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.

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.

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

The AI figures 'prove' that the series was good, not atrocious That's a "fact" that The Mirror could publish.

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.

"Doctor Who ratings crisis enters tenth year, 'sky still falling' say sources."

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.

I'm amazed to read such denial.

And I'm not going to elaborate on that.

Oh go on. That implies that you agree that there has been a "drastic" drop in ratings?

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.

Very consistent. (Although the highest any of the 8 series rated was Series 4, with 8 million, I believe.) Said before on here, by Seasons 6 and 7 of C20 Who, the figures were down to about 5-6 million, so C21 Who has kept things up even better in comparison. And I can't be in denial, that's a river in Egypt.

Sorry. Blame Fry and Laurie...

Edit: You didn't mention Series averages did you. Whoops.

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.

lol, more well researched information then!

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.

This is the Mirror we're talking about. If they didn't print garbage they wouldn't print anything at all.
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.