Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LightPhoenix" data-source="post: 1244028" data-attributes="member: 115">Well for one thing, I imagine the sampling size is adequate and somewhat balanced distribution-wise.  It's in their best interests as well as those of the advertisers and the networks, so I imagine they try to get it as statistically accurate as possible. But as I said before, ratings tend to stifle creativity.  It's extremely hard to be creative when you're forced to meet certain baselines, which generally means pandering to as broad an audience as possible.  Balancing the need to be as broad and simplistic as possible with trying to write an engaging, complex story, let alone a series, is nigh impossible.  One of the biggest complaints with Farscape was that it was really hard for people to get into.  That was an even bigger one with Babylon 5.  And that adversely effects ratings.  So most writers are caught between a rock and a hard place.  Not to mention executive interference, actors coming and going, and Kevin Sorbo, who is the devil.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  I do not envy them their jobs. The other branch of ratings which really kills creativity is focus groups, which are used to gauge what sort of ratings a show might get.  These groups are rarely large enough to constitute an unbiased sample, unlike actual Neilsen ratings.  These also tend to be excuses to allow executives to strong-arm writers into doing things that people want, as opposed to what is best for the show.  For an example, take Spike from Buffy, and now Angel.  He has a pretty high rating in these focus groups, so there's a lot of pressure to include him as much as possible - regardless of whether it's best for the show or not. Without the ratings system, and focus groups, networks would have to do something that actually requires effort.  That is, determine the success of their shows by actually keeping in touch with the general viewing audience.  But, it's another moot point because unfortunately ratings systems were invented, so shows that might be good but need time for word to spread, or shows that build up to success are pruned before they get even the merest of chances.  And since the system is so completely intergrated into the entertainment industry, removing it would require a total restructuring of the industry, which will never happen.  Ah, but to dream... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification