When Did TV Shows Shrink? (1 Viewer)

[Brian^K]

Oh! Some more numbers:

2008-2009
'24' = 24 episodes
Criminal Minds = 26 episodes
House = 24 episodes
NCIS = 25 episodes
Numb3rs = 23 episodes

 

[Jeff Willis]

can't argue with that, Joe. Most likely true in a lot of cases. Your line reminds me of one of my favorite 70's movies, "Charley Varrick" '73 (Walter Matthau, Joe Don Baker, William Schallert).

[scene in the gun shop between the gun dealer & that big Mafia gorilla (Joe Don Baker) ]

[Gun Dealer] " I got all the good will I need. If you want to know what I know, get some cash on the counter!"

[Joe Don Baker..after shoving the wheel-chaired gun dealer back against the wall sitting down on some boxes] "Now sit there and start talking...with good will!"

One of my all-time favorite movies...it's out in R2 with an anamorphic release. The R1's a 1.33:1 release.

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Well, we laugh now, I guess ... but there was a time when corporations did show some social responsibility, even if it cut into their profits ... or so I've heard.

As for the "ideal number of commercials" to maximize revenue, here's an example.

Having four minutes of commercials in a half-hour might bring in an audience of 20 million, enabling the network to charge $200,000 a minute, for a total of $800,000.

Having eight minutes might decrease the audience all the way down to 10 million -- but let's say the network can charge $120,000 a minute for that, for a total of $960,000 -- so it would be economically irrational not to have the eight minutes, and goodwill and a total larger audience go right out the window.

It's ok with me ... I haven't watched network television since the 1970s.

When I grew up in the '50s, most shows had 39 episodes a year, at 26 minutes for half hours and 52 for hours. I never dreamed things would deteriorate as badly as they did.

 

[Corey3rd]

some of the best tv for the last decade had zero ad breaks since they ran on HBO & Showtime.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Joe,

I grew up mainly in the 60's (b '55) but I remember the tail end of the 50's and the times per episode, Perry Mason, etc. I also am amazed how much the "hr-long" shows have shortened. As I only have 1 TV/DVD set from this century ("Firefly") I remember looking at the DVD player time counter watching that set.....42-43 minutes per episode vs the Perry Mason (early seasons) 52 min's per ep. That's a lot of time removed from the actual shows.

 

[Gary OS]

Jeff, I have to agree with you and Joe on this one. The amount of commercials in an hour long show is ludicrous at this point. On the rare occasions that I've tried to watch a current show (Smallville is the only one that comes to mind) it's always seemed very rushed, plot wise.

Gary "it's not just that I dislike the annoyance of disruption commercials bring, it's the horrible, inappropriate, R-rated ads that are placed within 'clean' shows" O.

 

[Brian^K]

"Total larger audience" is no one's objective, nor should it be. "Goodwill" is an illusion. Viewers are utterly disloyal, all by themselves, aside from any claims to the contrary. Just like investors care only about their own financial interests, viewers care only about what programming they like best, what will entertain them the most. They'll even follow their favorite program to a competing network; absolutely no loyalty to the network whatsoever.

 

[Brian^K]

Which cost about $10 per month, each. That's what it is going to come down to: You want good stuff? Well since your viewership isn't worth anything near what it used to be, now you have to put up cash.

 

[Corey3rd]

That's what it comes down to if you have to pay for shows that are willing to push boundaries since the networks now live in mortal fear of that prude in Texas who complains about seeing bellybuttons in primetime. You have the torch and pitch fork crowd led by Focus on the Family eager to attack any show. They're going to remain mild to appease the jerks. Still think it's amazing that CBS was able to clean up Dexter enough for regular broadcast. Although most of those episodes are over 50 minutes.

It's $12.50 in my area to see Up with the 3-D glasses. HBO and Showtime are bargains. Each has 10 different channels on my box. I get more HBO and Showtime than I used to get cable channel total as a kid. Plus if you get the digital OnDemand, you can watch the original programming on your schedule.

You always have to pay extra for the good stuff. That's how life is lived.

 

[Brian^K]

Truer words have never never spoken.

 

[Regulus]

Investors drive companies to serve their interests first. Companies that don't do that are punished, viciously and without restraint -- sometimes resulting in legal action against company directors who fail to take advantage of opportunities to enhance shareholder value that shareholders feel would benefit them.

QUOTE]

I can some this up in TWO WORDS!

CORPERATE GREED!

 

[Brian^K]

Cooperative greed? Yes, I suppose you can call millions of American citizens investing in their futures through stocks, and 401(k)s, and other investment instruments, to be " cooperative greed" on our part. Everyone want to have the good life, and a comfortable retirement. I think your calling it "cooperative greed" is a little silly, but that's your prerogative.

 

[Gary OS]

I'm pretty sure he meant corporate greed. And not everyone that watches TV has stock in networks or the advertisers. I honestly think you are only looking at this situation from the "corporate" or network side of things. We have these type of discussions on this forum all the time and the biggest arguments are often because people fail to see both sides of things, and instead only discuss things from one side of the equation. I think there should be room enough for both the practicals (the way it is) and the ideals (the way it should be/the way we'd like it to be). Peace.

Gary "I realize this twisted world we live in revolves around money, money, money - but I don't think Joe should get slammed for talking about worthy ideals" O.

 

[Joe Tor1]

Jeff:

That was exactly my point when I started this thread – what now seems like ages ago!

I was also born in ’55, and probably have most of the same memories that you do.

My collection begins with Perry Mason, and is mostly made up of the sixties shows that I’ve enjoyed all my life.

It was when I got into two modern shows, Lost and Heroes – thanks exclusively to DVD, that I noticed that these shows were a FULL TEN MINUTES shorter than their predecessors, and that was the basis for the thread.

I expected this to be a “Three-and-Out” thread, where someone would quickly answer my question and we would all move on – but instead it has evolved into a fascinating and multi-layered, full-throated discussion that may have plenty of life left in it!

I think that’s great and thanks to all of you – and keep it up!

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Things have gone to extremes here. I never said corporations shouldn't earn a profit. I said maximizing profit shouldn't be their only concern.

Stockholders can get a decent return on their investments without corporations throwing aside every single concern in the world except making as much money as possible.

I'd feel odd living a life in which I'd be forced to say, "Oh, look, we can make the MOST money by having 12 minutes of commercials in each half hour, so let's do that!"

I'd like to think I could say, "You know, it's true we'd make $200,000 a week less if we limit the commercials to four minutes a half hour, but we'd get a much larger audience and make people a lot happier, so let's do that."

Maybe I wouldn't, though. Who knows?

 

[Brian^K]

I try to always look at things from a balanced perspective -- and that's with regard to anything, not just related to television. I am a consumer, of course, and indeed my 401(k)s are invested in "suppliers". Clearly, my tendency, like anyone's, would be to see things from the side of their life that is closest to their day-to-day actuality, i.e., as a consumer, because we buy things every day, but I work really hard to understand the other side, and therefore I believe my perspective is a very balanced one.

I have no doubt that from the consumerist side of things, the balanced perspective looks like a corporate-only perspective.

 

[Gary OS]

Never mind. Life is too short.

 

[Brian^K]

IMHO, you shouldn't. It's the same as saying, "active persons should eat 0.6 to 1.0 grams protein per kilogram ideal body weight, per day." It is a rational, factual, and measured determination of what is best, given reasonable parameters of goodness.

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Well, I always say everyone draws the line somewhere, eventually.

If TV could determine, as radio seems to have determined, that maximum profits would result from having 29 minutes of commercials an hour -- would they do it? Or would they fear too much of a public outcry? I bet in that case they'd sacrifice some profits in order to uphold what's left of their reputations.

Similarly, even Fox must pass on some shows that are so vile it doesn't matter how much money they'd make. (I realize that's quite an assumption there ...)

 

[MatthewA]

For that to happen it would have to be something along the lines of "Springtime for Ahmadinejad" or "2 Girls 1 Cup: The Sitcom". But I wouldn't rule those out.