Body of Proof - Season 1 (1 Viewer)

[Stan]

I just use his site for daily ratings only.  Body of Proof got helped by their improved ratings the last couple of times.  It's a quality show with good writing and acting. 
Crawdaddy

They did do some really good episodes towards the end. Glad it worked out and they made it to a third season. To bad Jane Curtain went to "Unforgettable". I really enjoy her and she would have fit in well with "Body of Proof".

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Hope that people like him don't have much say in whether a show fails or succeeds, because he's not always right. Plus he may actually influence shows to make it or fail based on the "official" look of his site.

People like him have NO say in whether a show is renewed or not. There are only three players in those decisions: 1) The advertisers. The amount they're willing to pay enough to advertise on the show has to be enough for the network to make money on the show. Usually this is determined by the ratings, but not always. The audience for "Blue Bloods" for instance skews very old, but it's also very affluent and therefore desirable to certain high end product advertisers. 2) The production studio. How much will they charge the network for new episodes? The lower the studio's fee, the lower advertising income has to be. A show like "Fringe" would normally have been canceled years ago based on its ratings. But Warner Bros makes enough money on overseas sales, home video sales, and syndication rights that it's willing to sell first run rights to Fox at a loss. 3) The network. Ninety percent of the time, the numbers that come in from the advertisers and the studios make the decision for the networks. But not always. Sometimes network heads take a liking to a show they've shepherded over the years and keep it alive even when it's not the most competitive. Sometimes networks will handle an underperforming show with kiddie gloves because they want to be in business with star talent behind or in front of the camera. Sometimes they make a gut call, or "buzz" around a show gives the network something that it can't qualify. CBS keeps "The Good Wife" around because its their prestige show, and gives the network as a whole a higher caliber image.
Sites like TV By the Numbers play the same role as the oddsmakers in the newspaper in towns with horse tracks. They can examine the data, they can quantify the background information, and they can make educated predictions about how things will transpire. But when the gun goes off, the oddsmakers have no control over what happens between the starting gate and the finish line.

 

[Stan]

Sites like TV By the Numbers play the same role as the oddsmakers in the newspaper in towns with horse tracks. They can examine the data, they can quantify the background information, and they can make educated predictions about how things will transpire. But when the gun goes off, the oddsmakers have no control over what happens
between the starting gate and the finish line.

Thank you for the information. Never compared him to the oddsmakers for horse races and other things, but now it makes perfect sense.Thanks again for the explaining the scam this guy runs.
Like you said it's strictly numbers, he doesn't take any of the true network information into account and hopefully has no influence on whether a show makes it or not.

 

[Josh Dial]

Originally Posted by Stan /t/310280/body-of-proof-season-1/60#post_3925304
Thanks again for the explaining the scam this guy runs.

It's clear you still don't understand.

 

[Stan]

It's clear you still don't understand.

Not quite sure what you mean. Not to be rude, probably just naive, but could you please explain what you mean? I'm always learning and would like to read your opinion.
Thanks

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Not quite sure what you mean. Not to be rude, probably just naive, but could you please explain what you mean? I'm always learning and would like to read your opinion.

The site doesn't run a scam, just as the oddsmakers aren't scamming readers. They make the best predictions they can with the information that's publicly available. Just like the oddsmakers, they will get it wrong often, but their success rate will be much higher than the layman who doesn't take the time to study all of the information and spend the time getting a feel for how similar scenarios have played out in the past.
When they get it spectacularly wrong, as they did in this case with "Body of Proof", it's because the renewal didn't revolve around the usual ratings calculations. Whether it was a matter of having something to air at 10 PM, as Matt Hough pointed out, or some factor behind the scenes not made public, ABC saw value in keeping the show around for reasons that the headline numbers didn't justify. Since the predictions made by TV By the Numbers revolve around those headline numbers, it set them up for a big mistake.
The site's never claimed to be infallible, it just weighs probabilities based on the math for its readers. It neither claims to be, nor should be viewed as, a definitive end all source for whether shows will be renewed or canceled.

 

[Nelson Au]

I think the possible impact a site like bythenumbers has is the influence it may or may not have to put the idea in the heads of some audience members that a series is about to be cancelled and so they may give up and turn away. But that I would imagine only applies to those viewers who are being counted by however the ratings work today. I imagine the days of being selected and asked to fill a diary of what I watch a week and mailing that in are over. how do they do it these days?

 

[Walter C]

In fairness to the web site, Body of Proof ended this season in April, which is usually not a good sign for a show on a major network, in terms of renewal. To me, it was as if ABC wanted to end its run quickly before May sweeps, showing a lack of confidence in the show.

 

[Stan]

Sorry for my ignorance and relying on a "by the numbers" website. Thanks to all of you for explaining things to me. Maybe I came off as a little dense, but I put to much trust into a single website that relied strictly on the numbers. Obviously not a scam website, no difference from a horse racing form, just looking at a different subject.
Still glad "Body of Proof" is coming back. Overcame some bad numbers and we'll probably never know how it survived, but it's back and I'm pleased.

 

[Greg_S_H]

I imagine the days of being selected and asked to fill a diary of what I watch a week and mailing that in are over. how do they do it these days?

From my own reading of TVBN, I would say that is still exactly how it's done. I just watched a "ratings explained" video a week ago that mentioned diaries (though, whether they are still snail-mailed in, I don't know). They are supplemented by anonymous DVR numbers, but I don't think Nielsen or the advertisers put as much weight behind that since everyone knows a recorded show lets you make use of the nice little FF button.
One thing I don't understand is when fans say, "Even if you record it, watch it within a few hours so the numbers look better." I know they have DVR+3 (hours) and DVR+7 (I think that's days). What I don't understand is, if I'm recording a show on my DVR, it is on and tuned to that station at that time. How do they know I'm not watching it along with the recording?

 

[Nelson Au]

And how do they get the overnight ratings the next day?
Perhaps the selected viewers have a TV top box that records what you are watching? I thought I heard that done a few years ago. it's is a mystery how the DVR's are counted when tabulating the ratings.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I believe the "regular" Nielsen families have a device attached to their televisions, while the diaries (in whatever form they may take now) are reserved for sweeps, when their sample size greatly expands.

 

[Stan]

Not sure how the ratings are calculated by the next day, but if you look at the TVBM site, a day or two later almost every show gets adjusted up or down. Also not sure how DVRs are counted, but I know they are part of the ratings, probably a huge part since you can fast forward through the junk.
As Greg mentioned, thank God for the FF button, I've probably seen maybe ten commercials in the past three years since I switched to DISH and got their DVR.
Bad part about that is the advertising geeks will probably find a way around it. The annoying popups and crawlers drive me crazy now, who knows what other crap they'll come up with.
I already miss portions of shows that are subtitled because I've apparently trained my brain to ignore all the extra junk that appears on the screen during a show. I literally do not see it, it just doesn't register and similar to the way your brain fills in the missing portions of things, I get a full picture. Same thing with the endless opening credits of shows like Bones and others that run for 10-15 or more minutes. I truly see through them, not paying a bit of attention to the credits and just watch the show.
About the only way now to see a real show with no network logos or other garbage is to get the DVD or Blu Ray version.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Real Bummer: John Carroll Lynch Exits Body of Proof
Bud was my favorite character on the show.

 

[Walter C]

Originally Posted by Adam Lenhardt /t/310280/body-of-proof-season-1/60#post_3935610
Real Bummer: John Carroll Lynch Exits Body of Proof
Bud was my favorite character on the show.

That sucks! He was one of the reasons why I tuned into this show, and liked his clashes with Megan.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Nicholas Bishop and Sonja Sohn also fired
Apparently the third season came with a dramatically smaller budget, and the easiest place to save money was onscreen talent. Since Sohn's also out, I'm guessing Megan will either be teamed with a new pair of detectives (played by much cheaper talent) or the structure of the show will be changed dramatically.

 

[Stan]

To bad Nicholas Bishop is leaving, enjoyed his character and there were other "excess actors" that should have left before him. I felt it had way to many cast members, but they seem to have dropped some of my favorites.
As for budget, it's wasn't just the actors, I just read that they've only been renewed for 13 episodes, seems more like it will be used as filler than a full season, but you never know. It started out as a short season, maybe it will catch on again and be back for more.

 

[Stan]

Just a coincidence, but I received a mailer from Nielsen just last week.
No box on my TV to truly track what I watch, DVR, skip etc. It was simply a triple folded questionnaire related to my viewing habits.
What time of day I watch TV, do I have a DVR, my age, do I speak Spanish, blah blah blah.
The only rating related item was one question where I list my top three shows I currently watch.
I'm filling out Grimm, The Big Bang Theory and probably The Good Wife.
They even included two brand new crisp one dollar bills as a bribe/incentive to send in the form. I'll do it, maybe it will keep me on their mailing list and I might actually become a Nielsen viewer where they monitor everything I watch. Will probably shock them, since I watch nothing live, it's all DVRd so I can cut commercials and watch things when I feel like it.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Stan /t/310280/body-of-proof-season-1/60#post_3935804
To bad Nicholas Bishop is leaving, enjoyed his character and there were other "excess actors" that should have left before him. I felt it had way to many cast members, but they seem to have dropped some of my favorites.
As for budget, it's wasn't just the actors, I just read that they've only been renewed for 13 episodes, seems more like it will be used as filler than a full season, but you never know. It started out as a short season, maybe it will catch on again and be back for more.

I think the show is doomed. They just let go three of my favorite characters so it won't be the same show to me as the dynamics have changed. Why is Jerri Ryan essential to the show? I rather let her go for budgetary reasons than the actors playing the investigators.

 

[Walter C]

I guess that does not bode well for Peter.

I thought if someone was going to get cut, it would be Ethan and the other guy played by the Miller Lite guy, as I found those characters very expendable.