Traditionally, a show’s success
is marked by their Nielson ratings and viewership. More commonly today, a show’s success can be assessed
by the following it builds. Viewers aren’t
enough, you need fans.
Viewers are passive. They watch a show casually and move on from
it once the show is over and will maybe try to catch it again next week if they
are available. Fans talk, tweet, blog,
and recommend shows to others. The
television industry must cater to these people when it comes to writing, content,
engagement and delivery. A lot of times,
fans are more than happy to return the favor.
Steven Moffat fully understands this, especially when it
comes to his two biggest hits, Sherlock
and Doctor Who. Both “fandoms” have shaped how he tells his
stories. He is very engaged in the
communities and brings that to his writing.
Many times, fans have asked for a Sherlock
and Doctor who crossover. This could never happen because Doctor Who is a Sci-fi show about a time
traveler and Sherlock is about the
fictional, yet more realistic, character of Sherlock Holmes. Steven still found a way of bringing the two
together. In a Christmas episode of Doctor Who, The Doctor pretends to be
Sherlock Holmes to gain access into someone’s home. It’s a very campy and parody-esque scene that could be overlooked by
a casual viewer, but to fans it was the moment they’ve been waiting for. 
Another show runner who has taken the fans and the community
of “gladiators” that they have built into consideration is Shonda Rhimes and
the cast of Scandal. It’s interesting how they have collectively
taken Twitter by storm and have made the show into something greater than what’s
just on the screen. Each week, Shonda
and multiple members of the cast will live tweet the episode as it airs on the
east coast, and sometimes on the west coast as well.
The show has even created its own hashtag, #AskScandal, to
generate and pull specific questions out to answer. They respond to the fans and will have full
on conversations with each other as the show is airing. Kerry Washington, who plays the lead role on
the show, has her own team of tweeters called “kw's krew” who will respond for her when
she can’t. They’ll give insight to
behind the scenes details and talk about the outfits and designers that she
wore on the episode. All of this makes
the show more than a 42 minute broadcast each week.
All of these shows have been held to higher standards, not
because of ratings or the numbers that they pull in for the networks, but
because of what they have built with their audience. When the audience is engaged they become very
loyal. This makes the audience feel
important. It shows them they are not
just a person sitting on their couch watching the show, they are a vital part
of the machine that makes the show happen.
Ian Jackson
Ian Jackson
Like Ian mentioned in his above post, television programs that make an effort to connect with and reward their audience tend to set themselves up for success in the long run. Shows like The Walking Dead, Scandal, Community and Breaking Bad have been able build strong, intelligent fan bases that keep the writers, producers and actors on their toes. I believe that this model of fan interaction and building a deep-rooted sense of connection is best way to ensure a program makes a lasting impact. Instead of sacrificing the integrity of the show to cater to a larger demographic, these programs stay true to themselves.
ReplyDeleteThe example of Community is a strong one, as its run on television has been an extremely unique one. I’ve been exposed to many fans of the show, and I find it amazing the amount of knowledge and enthusiasm the vast majority of them have. There’s a reason for this, and it’s not just because followers of the show tune in week after week. The program not only has a strong team of writers who tediously pen scripts that meet the standards of the fans, but it has a big presence on the internet, arguably the most important medium in the marketing and disseminating of information. The show’s creator, Dan Harmon, along with many cast members, are actively invested in Community outside of filming obligations. These are people that genuinely care about the show, often interacting with fans on social media. Commitment like that separates this show from the rest of the pack, and was more than likely the only reason it was able to survive a hiatus and a cancelation. The campaign to bring the show back was unprecedented and proof that the model works.
With that said, I do not blame some programs for their rating-grabbing methods. There’s really no better way to prove statistically that your show is clicking with an audience. If you can’t get people to sit down and watch your show at the time it airs, that will likely determine whether or not it’ll get picked back up, regardless of streaming success or internet presence. Although, now that Nielsen has begun to include a program’s Twitter ratings, there have been many shows that have benefitted. Scandal, as Ian mentioned earlier, has seemingly perfected the use of the popular site. The show was shown to have dominated the Twitter-sphere whenever it airs, manufacturing over 700,000 unique tweets from over 170,000 unique tweeters the week of September 30th. Compare the to the second place finisher from that week, Miley: The Movement, which received just 90,000 tweets from 142,000 tweeters (Lawler). Clearly, Scandal has a substantial grasp and understanding of the power of hashtags and mentions. With the help of shows like these, second-screen usage has been propelled into the mainstream over the past few years, with audiences enhancing their viewing experiences with the help of a smart phone or laptop (Shih).
All this sparks the argument of quality versus quantity. Does it mean more to these showrunners that they have excessive amounts of passive viewership, or do they shoot for a more niche show for a more emotionally invested audience?
Lawler, Richard. "Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings Launch with ABC's Scandal in the Top Spot This Week." Engadget. N.p., 7 Oct. 2013. Web. 03 Feb. 2014
Shih, Gerry. "Twitter and Nielsen Pair up to Publish New "social TV" Ratings." Reuters. N.p., 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
Nicolette Illiano
ReplyDeleteHow many television series do you know today have such a huge fan base of avid viewers that they’re referred to as a sort of cult? I can think of at least four off the top of my head. As Ian mentioned in his post, writers of television series’ today are writing to get a fan base, but most importantly to keep them. Why? Because when someone gets hooked on a show all they want to do is talk about it – whether it is with their friends or on social media. All the hype over a TV show or series from one group of people can lead to a whole new group of viewers because of their curiosity. These people want to know why their friends love the show so they watch an episode and wind up getting hooked too. News of a great series can spread like wild fire, and the same goes for its fan base. I personally have not yet started watching the show Scandal because of my schedule, but I hear about it on a daily basis because my roommates are hooked. One of them started watching it, wouldn’t stop talking about it and got our other roommate and her boyfriend obsessed. This happens on a daily basis with various series’ and many different individuals. I admit, I’m one of those “cult-like” fans that won’t rest until all of my best friends are watching my at-the-time favorite show.
As I stated above, when viewers are adamant about a series all they want to do is talk about it. Twitter has become one of the largest outlets for audiences to discuss their opinions about all types of television. Many shows even provide a hashtag in the corner of the screen to get social media conversations going about the current episode. Some shows, like The Voice, base their results on the amount of tweets or hashtags a certain contestant receives. In my opinion, it took Neilsen long enough to update their rating system and add in the “Twitter TV Ratings.” Shih’s article states that the new ratings “arrived at a moment when media and advertising industry executives say they are observing a shift in TV viewing habits that include the rise of "second screen" use” (Shih). This could not be more accurate. Almost everyone I know, myself included, scrolls through their Twitter, Instagram or Facebook feeds during TV commercials. Most of these social media feeds include conversations or thoughts about shows that the individual is live-viewing. These tweets or posts could be a reminder that a show is currently on to anyone that may have forgotten, but they also allow producers to see what exactly the audience is saying about the show or episode. According to Lawler, “19 million unique people in the U.S. composed 263 million Tweets about live TV in Q2 2013 alone.” That’s A LOT of opinions and feedback that producers and stations can use for the future.
Who knows, maybe if the Twitter TV Ratings are a success Nielsen will eventually take time-shifted viewing into account. I think that would be the only way their rating system would ever be truly up-to-date with the times.
Lawler, Richard. "Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings Launch with ABC's Scandal in the Top Spot This Week." Engadget. N.p., 7 Oct. 2013. Web. 03 Feb. 2014
Shih, Gerry. "Twitter and Nielsen Pair up to Publish New "social TV" Ratings." Reuters. N.p., 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCara Gilmartin
ReplyDeleteIan makes a great point in stressing the importance of fandom. While I believe it is important for any type of media to have an established fandom, it is definitely the most important to music and television show. These two aspects of media must have a dedicated following in order to be successful over a long period of time. With the popularity of social media in today’s society, why not use it to make a connection with fans? The idea of cast members live tweeting during the airing of an episode makes a loyal fan want to sit down and watch the episode right then and there.
Yes, time shifting and binge viewing has made a major impact on the television industry, but it can never take over. The use of Twitter and other social media outlets prove it. When a viewer can watch a show, connect with a cast member, and potentially provide feedback, he or she feels like much more than just a viewer. They can feel as though they are playing a part in the success (or downfall) of the show.
I think it’s great that Nielsen and Twitter created a partnership. It is certainly one step closer to making their rating system as accurate and credible as it once was. Technology will forever be changing rapidly, so it is understandable that it has taken time for Nielsen to catch up. However, we have reached the point where it is inevitable. All the tweeting has to mean something to them now.
In the article, “Twitter and Nielsen pair up to publish new "social TV" ratings,” author Gerry Shih writes, “Twitter's convergence with television has been on display during sporting and major news events, which have provided some of the biggest viewership moments for both broadcasters and the social media company.” (Shih) Since this article was written in December 2012, I think it is safe to say many big viewership moments have now come from television episodes as well.
When the Breaking Bad season finale aired, I felt like I was a part of the fandom solely because of my Twitter feed. And if you follow me on Twitter, you probably feel like you think Olivia Pope could handle your most recent crisis, without even really knowing who Olivia Pope is. The point is this – in 140 characters or less, the conversation is happening. The conversation is important – to fans and to Nielsen.
Almost one year later, in an October 2013 article, “Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings Launch With ABC's Scandal in the Top Spot This Week,” author Richard Lawler explained that 19 million Americans typed up 263 million live tweets during television shows. (Lawler) I’d like to bet that Dr. Burns, Ian and I made up a solid amount of those – just from tweeting about Scandal alone. You’re welcome, Nielsen.
Lawler, Richard. "Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings Launch with ABC's Scandal in the Top Spot This Week." Engadget. N.p., 7 Oct. 2013. Web. 03 Feb. 2014
Shih, Gerry. "Twitter and Nielsen Pair up to Publish New "social TV" Ratings." Reuters. N.p., 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
In my opinion, Nielsen is an extremely weird and poor way of tracking viewership in this day in age. Even with the new update that now has them collaborating with Twitter, it still is not as accurate as it needs to be. Nielsen claimed that, “The new ratings will measure the number of people discussing a show on Twitter, as well as those who are exposed to the chatter, to provide the "precise size of the audience and effect of social TV to TV programming." However, like Ian said, you can track viewers all you want, but you cannot track a real fan. Its a self-proclaimed reference that can be defined in more than one way, not just whether someone watches or not. Discussion is a great thing, and again as mentioned, helps create a buzz about a show and can even keep it airing. It’s sad to say that most television shows are all about ratings, numbers, tracking, and viewer exploitation in regards to things such as advertising. But, with the shows mentioned like Scandal, and even shows like Breaking Bad, Homeland, and House of Cards, I think Ian nailed the point that writers are realizing that they should be writing to stay true to themselves and the real fans. When a writer writes not for ratings, but for passion and loyalty to their fans, it creates a greater reward than rating success. This success is a new form. It takes the viewer and immerses them into the show. They become advocates, loyalists, and create a support system for their show like a parent would do for their child. Its a little intense to think about, but its true. And this is what establishes such a success that is immeasurable. Keeping a show on air simply by an outbreak of twitter rants and passionate fans cannot be forced or faked.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, what i sort of touched upon earlier was the exploitation of viewers and fans alike that makes me a little upset. Scandal topped the chart on Neilsen’s Twitter TV Ratings, having the almost six times the amount of tweets than the 2nd place holder. This is great for Scandal, in that its getting great feedback and great things said about it, but also it frustrates me at the same time because i think its beginning to get out of hand in the social media aspect. Six times the amount of tweets between first and second place? That’s excessive. I like that the audience gets to interact with the actual cast members, and that there are some clever hashtags, but there needs to be a line. In the Lawler article, it says “Whether or not this helps broadcasters focus on the best of TV programming remains to be seen, or if our screens will be so full of hashtags there won't be anything left to watch.” I completely agree with this statement. Our screens and every move will be broadcasted and analyzed and shoved down the throat of the viewer that eventually it will take away from the brilliance of the show. Everything will be about building the best twitter-chatter, and how well the show is marketed. It should not come to that and unfortunately that is what the future is looking like.
Not to be a Debby-Downer, but I feel as though negative sides have to be discussed as well. With all that said, and on a brighter note, i love Scandal and cannot wait until February 27th :)
-Ari Paluzzi
Lawler, Richard. "Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings Launch with ABC's Scandal in the Top Spot This Week." Engadget. N.p., 7 Oct. 2013. Web. 03 Feb. 2014
Shih, Gerry. "Twitter and Nielsen Pair up to Publish New "social TV" Ratings." Reuters. N.p., 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.
I believe that for a TV show (or movie, even) to be successful, it helps to cater more to the fans than to ratings systems and its more passive, fair-weathered viewers. As we have seen on numerous occasions, true fans of a show are so much more involved in it, especially with what Ian mentioned in terms of live tweeting and rousing support for their favorites. Another thing Ian talked about was that fans are more likely to suggest their favorite show to others. This is not something Nielsen ratings do for a show runner and their shows. Because there is a reciprocal relationship between shows, its writers, and its characters and actors, it is extremely beneficial to remember your fans and active viewers when writing new episodes and new seasons. This relationship between a show and its viewers is crucial to maintain. Very few people start watching a show based strictly on ratings; in fact it usually takes word of mouth to give them that extra push into becoming a new viewer, and hopefully eventually a dedicated fan.
ReplyDeleteIn his discussion about Doctor Who fans and Sherlock fans intertwining, Ian said that usually the combination of two such characters wouldn’t happen, particularly if the show was more dependent on its ratings than its fans. However, writer Steven Moffat found a way to please his fans, and I’m sure that for the fans who asked for the intersection of characters, there was no better feeling than knowing that the show runner of your favorite series is actually listening to you. In creating that very special Christmas episode, Moffat solidified a relationship as well as a viewership with a large number of his fans.
Aside from flat-out viewership, fans do tend to be more invested in other outlets a show creates, especially in terms of merchandise. I personally know a few people who own something Doctor Who related (ahem, Ian and Dr. Burns). As we discussed in class last week, this merchandising and catering specifically to fans helps a show in the long run, or what we call the "long tail." Even if passive viewership drops, the true fans will still be purchasing jewelry, t-shirts, and boxed DVD sets of their favorite show. This consumerism does not necessarily show up in “ratings.” Sure, creating some buzz or hype over your show is great, but these rating systems won’t always bring home the bacon. But when fans purchase a show’s merchandise, they are not only helping to support the show financially, but also serve as free advertisements.
Overall, fans are the backbones of a TV show’s success. They are the ones creating the most buzz, engaging in both social media conversations and watercooler talk, and they will always be a show’s biggest advocate. So if you’re wondering why your “new hit series” isn’t actually a hit, maybe you better take a better look at who you are actually targeting and make the final choice between your ratings and your audience.
-Katryn Flynn