Recently in The CW Category

For Broadcast Networks, the end is coming and it's time for them to Accept their fate.

This isn't to say ABC, CBS, FOX, MBS, NBC, Univision and The CW (and similar Broadcast Networks around the world) are going away.  They'll just have to transform into one of the million other "Channels" out there - high profile Channels with good programming and production values - but still just another button on the Great Media Grid like ESPN, TNT, USA, Oxygen, Justin.tv (indeed), YouTube, etc.

According to a model developed by Elisabeth Kubler-Ross in her 1969 book "On Death and Dying", there are Five Stages of Grief. 

Over the past 20 years or so, Broadcast Networks have bounced around the First Four Stages in an effort to fight off the inevitable:

1.  Denial:  Broadcast Networks will always be the only place to reach a large audience.  We don't see that ever going away.  No one is going to watch the shit they make on Cable.  It's nothing but George Foreman Grill infomercials and drunken Jackass teenagers riding their bikes into traffic.

2.  Anger:  It's just not right!  They make such crap on Basic Cable.  How are they pulling in more advertising than us?!  I don't give a shit about the ratings of "Jersey Shore", the content on Broadcast Networks is far superior and always will be.  Goddamnit!  And don't you dare mention that fucking "Mad Men" to me again!  And Hell will freeze over before we ever produce a series for that inferior platform  There's no syndication value.  It's bullshit!

3.  Bargaining:  The playing field is not level.  It's not fair.  We really need you cable and satellite operators to pay us to retransmit our signal.  Don't forget - we're the Broadcast Networks.  If you give us two revenue streams, we'll give you really great programming with high ratings and advertising rates that are healthy for everyone.  Don't you realize there is only one place to reach a large audience?

4.  Depression:  Remember when Saturday night was the greatest night on television - when three networks (and three network Presidents) controlled every household?  Everyone had incredible line-ups.  It will never be that good again.  Thursday night used to be a place where advertisers needed us to launch a new movie or car or department store sales.  Those were the days.  Oh well, at least we still have our beach houses and court side basketball seats.

5.  Acceptance:  It's going to be okay.  It's not so bad to be equated with TBS.  I mean, they have Conan O'Brien now.  They are sort of like a Broadcast Network.  And we're still bigger than most of the other Channels.  And we'll get the Super Bowl back one day (after ESPN and The Food Network have their turns).  It's all good.

--------------------------------

The death of Broadcast Networks may not happen in the next five years but it IS going to happen and the sooner we put them out of their misery and end that painful decline, the faster the industry can heal and begin to grow again. 

Make no mistake, nothing can be done to save Broadcast Networks.  It's an old concept in a new world. 

For old school TV executives and their Madison Avenue chronies who are accustomed to lavish Upfront Presentations at Carnegie Hall, Madison Square Garden and the International Space Station, it's time to just let it go.  The Days of Wine and Roses and Fine Dining and Muffin Baskets are over.

Broadcast Network defenders (yes, Les Moonves, this means you) are becoming pathetic.  Face the facts, ESPN and Google are more valuable than CBS.  It may not seem fair - but there are many new Sheriffs in town.   Remember, if  you're in a business where single-digit drops in viewers is the New Growth, your business sucks.

So what are the Broadcast Networks supposed to do next?  Very simple.  Just accept equal footing (two revenue streams - subscription and advertising - enough with this silly Retrans business that no one can understand) and continue to run your business as just another Channel on the Grid. 

In the future (and it's coming), with a channel lineup grid that will be sorted Alphabetically and not by "importance" or "size" (and will include TV channels, websites and whatever else comes up) programming is, as it always has been, King . 

And may the best programmer win.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

Attention to Dawn Ostroff and all those concerned at The CW - it's time. 

It was a valiant attempt to bring back the 1990s glory days of small network success, but it's time - time to kill Melrose Place.  The CW IS The WB and should be all about The Vampire Diaries and Gossip Girl.  That's your sweet spot.  Melrose Place is too old.  Embrace the mental teenagers that you are!  Stop trying to move out of mommy and daddy's house.  Let CBS get old and die.  The CW is forever young.  Their characters don't pay bills and rent apartments.  But I digress...

Last night's episode, Episode 6 "Shoreline" received a 1.0/2 rating.  That's not A18-49 - THAT'S TOTAL HHs.  It's over.  Air repeats of Roswell or Felicity.  Show Color Bars.  Show anything.  But stop showing Melrose Place.  It's not easy to get that small of an audience.  A show really has to work hard at NOT connecting with viewers to get that low of a rating.

You pulled the trigger at the right time on The Beautiful Life:TBL, it's time for the characters of Melrose Place to strap on the mini-dresses, stick their feet in cement and jump into the pool.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

After only two pathetically rated episodes, The Beautiful Life: TBL has the distinction of being the first show cancelled of the 2009/2010 television season.  Sorry Mischa.  You heard it here first... last week.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

With a 1.1/2 rating for its PREMIERE, this show is done.

Sorry Dawn.  One out of three ain't terrible.  If it weren't for The Vampire Diaries... well, you know the rest.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

Ms. Ostoff made this horrific comparison yesterday in Pasadena at the Television Critics Association Press Tour.

[From The Hollywood Reporter:  "It was really a 'Sophie's Choice,' Ostroff said of trying to choose projects for next season with only 10 hours to fill.]

Seriously, Dawn?  There was no other phrase you could use. 

"Sophie's Choice" was a decision Holocaust survivor Sophie Zawistowski had to make on which of her children would live and which would die in a Nazi concentration camp.  Sure, it was a work of fiction by William Styron - but he has even said that it was based on a real story (fyi, Meryl Streep won the Academy Award for her portrayal in the movie).

The decision on which child a parent would choose to live and which to die is the same as which TV show on The CW makes the schedule and which doesn't?  The Gossip Girl spin-off or The Vampire Diaries?  Supernatural or One Tree Hill? 

I know it was said on the fly and was meant to convey that it was a difficult choice - but come on.  Imagine what the Right Wing Pundits would say if President Obama, during the recent Beer Summit, said "It's really a 'Sophie's Choice' in deciding which beer to drink." 

I started OnMedea with the intention of having a positive tone in regards to the world of media (with the exception of anything concerning Ben Silverman) - but that's been really difficult based on what I'm discovering out there. 

I certainly hope Ms. Ostroff made the right decision and the new "Melrose Place" lives up to her expectations.

For the record, Sophie chose the boy.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea - (I understand the slight irony that I write these things under the blog title OnMedea - a fictional woman who slaughtered her kids after finding out her man had an affair.)