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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Orius" data-source="post: 2122626" data-attributes="member: 8863">Why Star Trek is dead? Because it's constantly beaten like this on the Internet much like a deceased equine.Seriously though, I've been arguing the UPN is part of the problem for a while.  They're not going to pull in big ratings when UPN is only aired in larger TV markets; how are they going to compete with ABC/CBS/NBC or even Fox, which have stations all over the place?  There's no local UPN station here, but at least Enterprise stayed in a stable synidcated time slot.  Voyager however kept bouncing around.  That sort of crap's going to kill the market.Then it doesn't help when you don't have the right audience on your network for the show in the first place.  WB at least got its act together fairly quickly, and found some success in airing programs that appealed to teens and young adults. UPN spent about 10 years airing all sorts of stuff like it was a Big 3 network back in the old days.  Only within the last few years did UPN find it's own niche, which I understand is urban minorities and 18-35 women.  Not exactly the demographics for sci-fi.  It didn't help when WB stuck Smallville in the same time slot (can't stand when networks pull nonsense like this).    So  what do they do?  They pull the genius move of putting it on Friday night, which is a bad night for viewership in the first place, and in the second place has become a big night for Sci Fi  to air their big shows.  So naturally the ratings tanked.  Maybe if Viacom execs had half a brain, they would have pulled Enterprise off UPN and put it somewhere it could thrive becore it tanked.I think some blame should be placed on Berman and Braga's heads, particularly Braga, but Viacom's mismanagement of Star Trek played a significant role.</blockquote>

Verification