It's not black and white, one or the other. I accept the truth in some of your arguments, but there's still a contribution as well from the general TV audience decline, the change in viewing habits and that it's been on the air for 10 years.

Series 9 has seen a drop in viewing figures and I think a large chunk of that is coming from Series 8's less "instantly likable" Doctor and, perhaps, less populist, stories.

I personally think series 9 was a move towards a more "audience friendly" Doctor, from the Doctor as presented in series 8. Despite a few truly superb episodes in series 8, I think part of the issue with series 9's viewing figures is that some people didn't come back when they disliked series 8's Doctor. However, the stories have not become more populist and the pre-series publicity was less than inspiring. Whoever came up with "Same old, same old" as the tagline needs to work in a different industry.

The situation is far from irrecoverable though and there's no immediate danger of cancellation. Arguably, viewing figures are still "good" in absolute terms, if not the "best". It's still doing well when you compare the figures with those of other current shows.

I agree. I do personally think a lot is riding on who the new companion is, both in terms of the character and the actor they cast.

I think viewers have decided whether not not they like the 12th Doctor and I don't think they can change his character anymore without essentially creating a completely different incarnation played by the same actor.

I also think poor stories like Sleep No More and marmite episodes like Heaven Sent won't have helped. Hopefully a bit of light, colour, comedy and joy in season 10 will make a difference (with the different style promoted heavily in the trailers).

I agree that changing 12 further would not be a good move. A lot will hang on the choice of the next companion, both in terms of the actor and the character.

And, yes, less "Sturm und drang" and more fun.

The thing I can't ignore is the drop happened right from episode 1 and remained fairly consistent. It really is as though series 8 retained its audience throughout, but for a fair chunk of the audience they'd lost any enthusiasm about coming back for more.

It's difficult for me to conclude anything other than the portrayal of the Doctor must have been a significant factor in this. I'm not saying the *only* factor. But when you lose a million from one series to the next it's a bit hard to swallow that the reason is nothing at all to do with the content of the prior series.

They made a deliberate decision to make the Doctor less likeable - with the companion shown to be struggling to stay with him and actually giving up on him at the end of the series - a Doctor calling everyone pudding brains and showing callous indifference to people around him dying. Surely it's obvious that when you deliberately make the lead character less likeable, that a portion of the audience won't like him. And switch off.

I've seen lots of comments that the Sixth Doctor Redux of series 8 was exactly what they wanted and even that they were happy that the viewing figures had dropped. Because they didn't like sharing their supposedly dark brooding introspective naval gazing cult show with people who fancied David Tennant. As though the Doctor should be this irritating pain in the arse permanently. Well, thank goodness the production team didn't agree and softened him up. Series 9 is how he should have been from the get go. The series 8 characterisation idea made little logical sense and was taken over the top in the scripts.

It should be possible to keep the Doctor pretty much the same as he has been this series yet still have a bit more colour and less brooding about death (two series on the trot with arc plots about death and resurrection following two all about the Doctor's death). With a great opportunity for a companion that engages the audience on the strength of personality, rather than curiosity about their role in the arc plot. I'm not expecting a return to RTD's style of script writing - Moffat's way with narrative isn't going to suddenly change and needn't - it's often good stuff.

We don't need the "I'm so so sorry" soppiness of the 10th Doctor back, but series 8 Doctor was misjudged.

I think the fall in ratings is a culmination of things from series 6 onwards. Successive series that have simply failed to deliver come the finale. For all of the show runners arc plotting, mysterious companion arcs, come the finale it all fizzles out like a weak indoor firework. Take series 6, probably the most arc heavy series. The finale? The Wedding of River Song. A bland and excitement free whimper of a finale. After 3 series of arcs that do not deliver or just play out in a dull fashion why would an audience feel like investing in the next series?

The show runner also seems to be of the opinion that each new series needs to ring in the changes in order to keep things fresh. This approach, imo, has also played it's part in the publics growing disinterest towards it. There has been no continuity for the viewer from one series to the next. Yes, the show needs change from time to time, but not every series, especially when the same companion is almost being re-booted. For me, there has been the approach of 'third time lucky' to these changes.

Then there is Capaldi's Doctor. As much that I think Peter Capaldi is phenomenal actor there has been massive mistakes in his and Moffats approach to establishing the new Doctor in series 8

Since 2005 the underlying theme to the Doctor has been his torment over the Time War. We have been drip fed it over many series. We have seen the Doctor's soul searching. It would rear its head at the appropriate moments, all the way through from Eccleston/ Tennant and Matt Smith's run, culminating with the 50th.
Did we really need Capaldi's Doctor's 'Am I a good man' and brittle approach for series 8. Did we really need the soul searching? The viewer knows he is a good man, there was only one answer to that question, yes he is. Again, the showrunner's arc strand just kind of fizzled out.

As much as I personally liked it, the Davros two parter that opened series 9 was a bit too inward looking, serving die hard fans rather than the general audience, rather than the potential new viewer tuning in for the first time. Take one of the most praised episodes from series 8 'Mummy on the Orient Express' a whizz bang RTD era style episode. It is as if the showrunner looked at that episode and thought 'No more of that for series 9' Let alone start a new series off with a style that is a proven winner. The amount of two parters have not helped either, especially if one found them dull. Dull two parter after dull two parter is my lasting impression of series 9.

Then there is the companion of Clara (third time lucky) I think the general audience did not know where they stood with her. This comes down to the showrunner not knowing what to to with the character beyond her mysterious series debut. Is she still this impossible girl, is she a splinter, is she a computer genius, is she a nanny, is she a teacher, just what is it that stops her from traveling with the Doctor full time? Except for a token family Christmas dinner the viewer really isn't told. What was with nasty Stepmum and kind Grandma. Ah well…

I think the showrunner has to realise that the majority of the show's audience are not died in the wool, wear the t-shirt, buy the box set type of fan. I dare say the majority of the audience never rewatch an episode after it has aired, let alone binge on an entire series. It is here where I think the 'clever' arcs and timey wimey arc plots have had the opposite appeal to that of a fan that rewatches and dissects such things on the Internet.

Personally, I do not think the showrunner has been able to put his stamp on making a coherent series that works as a whole since series 5. That each series feels the need to change, to spruch things up, to take a different appraoch suggests a showrunner unable to pin down his own vision.


Are the ratings a disaster? No, not in my opinion. Could they be better, yes. I don't think the current showrunner has enough off new vision to make the show 'must watch' again. The drop off from Striclty's huge viewing figures to Doctor Who's is telling.

Imo.

The big problem with series 9 was series 8. It drove away 1 million viewers. Matt Smith's era still managed 8m each year and a bump for the Christmas episode. I don't see that with Capaldi.

Clarar took 2 years to become a character rather than a plot point. I still don't know Clara and I don't want to know her. A good actress with bad material to flesh out character.

A relatable, properly fleshed out character who is ordinary is essential for the next companion. The audience needs somebody in the show who they can relate to and connect with. If Moffat can get this right, then I think series 10 will do well. Also I believe word of mouth reviews of series 9 have been excellent and some of those who departed the show after series 8 may return.

For me, Last Christmas was one of the best stories of series 8. It was an example of the kind of tone that DW should always strive for. It had a good balance between character, humour and serious (but not universe or even planet threatening) threat. It was like a breath of fresh air after the (generally) serious tone of series 8 and in particular the morbid fascination with death and resurrection in the series finale.

It was a Christmas special and Christmas specials are normally "lighter" affairs than the main series run. Some would say certain previous Christmas specials have been too light and fluffy, but in this case, it brought the tone up to where the series should have been

Series 9 has lower audience figures because of series 8.

They pulled it back somewhat by lightening the Doctor a little, making him slightly less unpleasant, and driven by things we can relate to (the death of Clara). But, the Davros opener was too introspective for the general audience. It should have been later in the series.

I like two part stories in general. It gives the story and characters time to be developed and it avoids the rushed and slightly unfinished feel of some of the 45 minute stories. But there were too many. There should be one or two at most each series, plus the finale. I think 50 or 60 minute episodes would also be an improvement in future (but I am well aware of the commercial difficulties that would create).

I liked Clara's departure, finally. But, her "death" or at least "imminent departure", seemed to pervade the whole series and made the overall tone "gloomy".

Clara and the Doctor were not "having fun" in the TARDIS. I didn't see them really enjoying themselves - just Clara getting more reckless and the Doctor brooding on that.

I liked Ashildr and the idea of her immortality. But, she became a character bored with life and as a result contributed to the gloom of series 9. Plus the Doctor seemed to make her immortal on a whim, which seemed out of character, especially as he was worried about the creating a hybrid and the consequences for the future.

My recipe for series 10 would be to choose an energetic youthful companion off which the Doctor could spark and be a contrast with, a less brooding Doctor (viable as Clara is gone), plenty of one-off, off Earth stories, and minimal arc, if any at all. Above all have the characters have some fun, while dealing with the danger.

Personally I'd love a series of 10 one hour episodes. I know they picked 45 minutes to please commercial broadcasters but surely it can't be that much of a problem for them to accommodate a longer running time? Plenty of other BBC shows which must also get sold overseas run to an hour and I see it more and more frequently being adopted as a format for US dramas as well.

I agree. It's certainly not a problem on premium cable channels. Back in the day, US made shows ran to 50 minutes for a 60 minute slot. Over the years the amount of time in a slot given over to commercials has increased, bit by bit. It's the same in the UK after regulations controlling ITV's output were relaxed.

As many of us will know, DW in particular is broadcast in the US on BBC America. It's a niche channel compared to the total size of the US TV audience. It's never going to compete with the main US networks. Could it accommodate 60 minute episodes in a 90 minute slot? Fewer commercials could be a USP for the channel.

Commercial broadcasters in other markets are not as inflexible as they once were.

Sleep No More went from 5.61m to 5.99m in 28 day ratings.

Interesting. So around 300,000 people wait quite a long time before watching. OK, that doesn't claw the full 1.5 million back, but it does lend weight to the idea of many people binge watching weeks after original transmission.

I just did that with Ripper St. Recorded it from BBC1, but didn't get round to watching it until months later - I wouldn't have shown up even on the 28 days count. I did the lot over three evenings. And I've just watched 8 episodes of The Bridge over a couple of days too.

Ah, Ripper Street was rather good, wasn't it? I thought the Edmund Reid character was rather like a prototype Doctor and Matthew Macfadyen would make an excellent next Doctor.

And Ripper Street is back with season 4 on Amazon Prime next year!

I noticed that Luther returned last night with an audience of 4.9 million. I don't watch it myself but I thought that it was quite a popular drama and the rating seems very much in the ball park that Doctor Who has been getting. I'd be interested to see what it's final ratings are. Perhaps that's the sort of ratings that drama's can expect on TV these days because everyone else is too busy watching people bake cakes, watching TV or eating dung beetles?

Yeah, I saw that figure. And it had virtually no opposition from ITV at all. There are exceptions like Doctor Foster, which was quite the hit this year, but I think these days consolidated figures of 6/7 million are considered good for most dramas. It's about what the once all conquering soaps get regularly these days too.

(Just got the dung beetle reference. Thought it was a bit left-field before the penny dropped!)

That's how more and more people are watching telly these days. So the 'ratings' are becoming harder to quantify and thus less and less relevant.

Sherlock will buck the trend of ratings in 6 million territory. Call the Midwife and Downton are great performers.

Apparently Cuffs has been cancelled after one season. It started off with 4.93m viewers and by episode 6 was under 4m. I am assuming the figures I was looking at are final viewing figures.

Falling out of the channel's Top 30 after five weeks probably made it quite an easy decision.

It's a shame that nothing seems to be given a chance to grow anymore.
If a show isn't an instant HIT then the BBC seem to regard it as a terrible failure and scrap it. Although not my kind of series, a show like Cuffs looked like the sort of thing that could have grown and built familiarity, in much the same way as Holby or Casualty. It may not have been the most groundbreaking series ever, but ratings of 4 millionish really aren't that bad these days.

It seems a ridiculous decision I think... Game of Thrones didn't even hit 5 million viewers until midway through its third season and, besides already being established as a successful book series, the show has become a huge hit franchise. 4 million viewers for a first series isn't bad at all.

I am surprised to see Luther receiving just below 5 million though. It seems like TV dramas and viewing figures are falling more and more out of ways with each other.

Agree with this. As the BBC is under more scrutiny and pressure to justify the LF they do appear to require immediate success rather than let a series develop and find it's feet. Sure ratings were always a factor, but surely if they believe in a programme, it shouldn't be only deciding factor. That's probably naive, sadly? I believe they only recommissioned House of Fools and Stewart Lee's Comedy Vehicle (comedy fan, so those spring to mind) *after* they got a BAFTA. That's a bit hmmmm....never mind the quality, peruse the consolidated figures.

Cuffs first episode consolidated to 4.9m, but the last figure I know is the penultimate episode's overnight was down to 2.6m, so no surprise but a shame for those who really enjoyed it.

ETA 3.16m overnight for what's turned out to be it's last episode....

And how do they assess the success of traditional linear broadcast shows against shows on streaming services like Sens8 (on Netflix) and The Man in the High Castle (on Amazon Prime Video) which got released in (more or less) one block. (both excellent shows, BTW )

At the moment there's no logical basis for that, so making the task of those who have to decide whether (or not) to cull shows deemed unsuccessful even more tricky (subjective, perhaps?).

Also, at the moment, the figures for streaming services are very low compared to those for traditional broadcasting, so it currently doesn't matter too much. But you can see where this is heading...

The BBC has a duty to take risks and broadcast stuff that other broadcasters won't show, so a left-field show which gets a small but devoted following would be acceptable, whereas a "bog standard" police show I guess has to justify itself on ratings

Does it, I thought that was Channel 4's remit? (Or at least it was when Channel 4 was first founded).