Why Are Commander In Chief Ratings Headed South?

"'Commander' averaged a 2.4 rating on Tuesday night, an all-time low
for ABC's political drama. That's down 14 percent from the previous
week's 2.8 18-49 rating, its second lowest, for the show's first
original episode to air since Nov. 29. And it's down substantially,
38 percent, from the show's 3.9 season-to-date average."

I was surprised to read that Commander In Chief ratings are on a
downward slide (since Gina Davis just won a Globe). I don't watch the
show (I thought it would be too talky like The West Wing) but what's
you personal opinion on why the ratings are declining?

Brian Thorn...

The show's ratings were artifically high in October while its
principal competition, FOX's "House" was sidelined for boring baseball
games.

Once CiC started to get serious competition again, the ratings
declined.

deering24...

A combination of the hiatus, the network competition, and the switch in
producers. I caught its first couple of eps. partly because it started
early in the season. I got back into the shows across from it intending
to tape COC--but when I checked back in the eps. were kinda weak. Next
thing I know, it's on hiatus, and I figured by that point I'd probably
missed too much to catch up with it.

record.hunter...

Wow. Norman Lear was a liberal? Who'd'a thunk it?

1. Was it the 6 week hiatus?

kaydigi...

Yes, about 5 minutes ago I just watched the 11/29 show on my DVR. I like to
watch at least 2 episodes back to back and it sure was a long gap inbetween
new eps.

The same situation will doom Veronica Mars

gavalos...

Why? Veronica Mars had about a 4-week hiatus in late 2004-early 2003,
then another couple of weeks off before the February sweeps. Then after
Feb. 22 it was off for 5 more weeks during re-run hell. Looks like it
got renewed last year for a 2nd season that is now airing despite that
hiatus obstacle.

It's ruthless math -- and recurring math: With a TV show on the air for
a standard 22 episodes, and a calendar year having a typical 52 weeks,
unless you want to run episodes back-to-back starting in January or
February ala '24', THERE WILL BE BREAKS!

EVERY SEASON there are some people who gripe about multi-week breaks
for TV shows, apparently forgetting there's only so much one can do
with the current typical 22-24 episodes for a one-hour broadcast

Daniel Damouth...

I think many people forget or don't really know about the "sweeps"
periods, which, after all, make no friggin' sense. Long breaks are
bad for storytelling, especially for the more arc intensive shows,
and people respond to that illogic. Can't blame them for it.

I don't mind the networks scheduling shows around when they think
people will most be available to watch. But sweeps just seem useless
and annoying. You'd think ad revenue would be based on actual
viewership rather than arbitrary periods. Sweeps distort writing,
programming, and scheduling.

Down with sweeps.

-Dan Damouth

network drama.

BTR1701...

I think the people who gripe aren't really puzzled about the breaks.
They know that with 23 episodes, there will be breaks. What they're
griping about is that they think there should be more than 23 episodes.

Barry Margolin...

Well, they should get over it. Once upon a time it was normal for a

BTR1701...

Why?

show to have at least 26 episodes a season, a two-week break around
Christmas and occasional preemptions, then go into full reruns during
the summer. But those days are LONG GONE.

jayembee...

Even longer gone are the days when it was normal for a show to have

BTR1701...

Once upon a time there were a lot more than that.

BTR1701...

But they don't have to be which is the basis for the gripe.

jayembee...

In a market where a TV show can cost upwards of $1M per episode,
there's a big difference between being able to afford to shell out $22M
for a season of one show and $39M.

Barry Margolin...

Unfortunately, they probably do. The networks probably can't afford the
old programming model any more, in the 500-channel+Internet+video game
environment.

at least 39 episodes a season.

And those people should be glad they don't live in the UK, where a
"season" is typically 4-8 episodes, and you can never really be sure
when a series was going to be back on the air with another season.

Taylor...

Yeah, and that's why the 'Friends' should have considered this as a
backup plan when they decided to end the series.

2. Is it the political content?

kaydigi...

The show has like 15 % of 7th Heavan pumped in, that's not a good thing.

3. Is it the competition on other networks? (Commander's audience
switched to American Idol?)

4. Is the show not very good (stories, acting, direction, etc.)?

Veritas...

I'll take this one. It is predictable and strident. Geena Davis is
god-awful as the president and looks like her face is deep frozen.

kaydigi...

The shows has a great cast, tone down the 7th isms

5. Is the reality more interesting than a scripted TV show? (In other
words, these days would people prefer their TV dramas to be based on
something they can't get on the news?)

Steven L....

I think they shouldn't have brought in the overripe and over-the-hill
Steven Bochco.

I thought along with My Name Is Earl, CIC was the only certifiable big
hit of the season. Now it might be on the bubble. Think they'll move
it to another night?

Rob Jensen...

I wonder how it would do on Sunday nights at 9pm, in DH's timeslot. If
DH continues to suck, we might find out sooner rather than later, but
I'd like to see ABC experiment by putting a new episode of CinC in
DH's slot on a week that a repeat of the latter show might otherwise
have aired. Say, the first of a two-parter to be finish two days
later in its regular timeslot. During Sweeps.

-- Rob

deering24...

It's had enough of that kind of turmoil already. :) They might want to
concentrate on building their storylines/characters.

C.
**