Shellhead
03-21-2007, 03:44 PM
In the old days, the big three networks that dominated American television had a common vision of how to program a season of television. The new season would debut in late September each year, and last about 22 episodes per show, with breaks around Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Years. By spring time, the season would wrap up, and then the networks would show re-runs until the next season started up in the fall again. The theory was that people were more likely to be enjoying the weather outside in the warmer half of the year, and more likely to stay inside and watch tv during the colder half of the year.
These days, it's a mess. During it's rise to power, Fox started pushing the envelope by starting the new season earlier and earlier, and sometimes even starting new shows at odd times in the spring or summer. They realized that Americans were becoming more sedentary and thus more likely to watch tv year-round, regardless of the weather. Now all the main networks have changed to a more cynical schedule that delivers debut or finale episodes during key sweeps months like November and May, with more breaks in regular programming during non-sweeps months. Even the movies shown in off-peak time slots are better during sweeps months.
To make matters worse, Fox has lead the charge in rapidly cancelling low-rated shows. Networks traditionally waited until the first half of the season was over, and then bump shows for more questionable mid-season replacements, but now they will pull the plug after just a few episodes if the ratings are weak.
One more network programming trend that I dislike is the sporadic scheduling of the high-end shows. I think it started more than a decade ago with E.R., where they would show several episodes on a weekly schedule, then go on hiatus for a few weeks with re-runs before showing another series of new weekly episodes. This trend is even more pronounced with the high-end cable tv shows.
Combined, all of these trends make it harder to follow specific shows. It's hard to get into a show at first, wondering if it will be rapidly cancelled due to ratings. And it's hard to stay engaged with an ongoing show when new episodes only come out intermittently.
These days, it's a mess. During it's rise to power, Fox started pushing the envelope by starting the new season earlier and earlier, and sometimes even starting new shows at odd times in the spring or summer. They realized that Americans were becoming more sedentary and thus more likely to watch tv year-round, regardless of the weather. Now all the main networks have changed to a more cynical schedule that delivers debut or finale episodes during key sweeps months like November and May, with more breaks in regular programming during non-sweeps months. Even the movies shown in off-peak time slots are better during sweeps months.
To make matters worse, Fox has lead the charge in rapidly cancelling low-rated shows. Networks traditionally waited until the first half of the season was over, and then bump shows for more questionable mid-season replacements, but now they will pull the plug after just a few episodes if the ratings are weak.
One more network programming trend that I dislike is the sporadic scheduling of the high-end shows. I think it started more than a decade ago with E.R., where they would show several episodes on a weekly schedule, then go on hiatus for a few weeks with re-runs before showing another series of new weekly episodes. This trend is even more pronounced with the high-end cable tv shows.
Combined, all of these trends make it harder to follow specific shows. It's hard to get into a show at first, wondering if it will be rapidly cancelled due to ratings. And it's hard to stay engaged with an ongoing show when new episodes only come out intermittently.