Why Bad TV Shows Succeed - Vampires and Fans
Quality is only a Small Factor in Determining Success
Jul 14, 2009
Why do some television shows do well in one country but fail in another? It turns out that quality is only a small factor in determining the success or failure of a television show. This article will examine how social networks, timing, and subjectivity play a role in determining whether a show succeeds or fails.
The Social Networking/Audience Engagement Factor – Joss Whedon, Firefly, Dollhouse, The Listener
Science fiction fans are notorious in the media. They have conventions, they blog, and they maintain internet forums, but there’s also another important quality science fiction fans have: they’re valuable. Some shows take a while to gain an audience, and the sci-fi community can make a show worth the gamble. These fans not only watch a show but buy its merchandise, adding extra streams of revenue until a program gains an audience. Star Trek often struggled in the ratings, but the very public passion of the fans spread awareness of the program until the point where it became an franchise empire. With the internet, fans themselves often help to expand the audience, using internet forums to spread buzz.
If a show manages to connect with a socially networked audience, it has a greater potential of attracting a wider audience, however the social networking factor is also irrespective of quality. Niche character dramas without pre-built fan communities will likely fail to generate an audience through networking, even if they're good. Even in the same fan community quality can matter less than timing and experience: Joss Whedon’s fans campaigned heavily for his show Dollhouse, a show that had mixed reviews, and succeeded in gaining a renewal where a lesser campaign failed at prolonging the life of the widely acclaimed Firefly.
In short, if a show can for some reason engage an audience, that audience can help a show’s ratings grow. If not, the show can slowly founder, and a lack of a passionate fan base can spell trouble. The Listener has nearly no activity on its NBC Message Boards, while Chuck’s extremely engaged audience has kept its message boards busy despite the show’s season finale airing back in April.
The “Timing” Factor – True Blood, Moonlight, Aqua Teen Hunger Force
As time has gone by, audiences have been at various levels of receptivity to various types of shows. Crime shows are an excellent example of this. After 9/11 shows foiling terrorist bomb plots were extremely popular because they resonated with audiences, while there was a noticeable dearth of plots featuring Russians as the enemy, despite their past popularity. Trends in media can also emerge as certain genres of fictions become popular, providing ‘pre-built audiences’ for certain genres. The most notable of these at the moment would be the ‘Vampire Genre’, which currently is arguably better than science fiction at building instantaneous cult-followings.
The “before its time” factor is another point to be considered. Comedies which are self-aware and absurd are commonplace now, the Cartoon Network’s Adult Swim lineup has been built off of them (e.g. Aqua Teen Hunger Force). Gradually a tolerance for these shows is entering mainstream networks as well. Ten years ago this would not have been the case. People do not watch television because it’s challenging, rather, they watch it because it’s easy, any show which feels too different to the populace is likely to remain unwatched regardless of just how brilliant it is. This is why there is no “The David Lynch Show” on TV right now.
The Subjective Factor – Flashpoint, Durham County
Of course, quality is a subjective measure; but subjective measures are still accurate and valuable. If quality were to determine a show’s success more Americans would be watching Hugh Dillon on Durham County than Hugh Dillon on Flashpoint, but ultimately, quality is just a small piece of the puzzle.
This is part two of a two-part series on this topic. Part one can be found here.
