|Viewing Single Post From: Interesting/Spoilerish Tweets, Week of 11/19|
|annie21||Nov 22 2012, 06:56 PM|
I think you and Matt make many valid points, and we ultimately agree that the show should just concentrate on writing good stories. Just three points to add to what you've both said:
1) A show that's been around as long as Days creates viewer relationships that extend well beyond any single set of writers and producers. Many people wander in and out of regular viewership for various reasons, as have been stated by several in this thread. So, even though some people may not be able to tune into the current regime for whatver reason (school, life, aversion to writers, etc.), that doesn't negate their overall fandom of the show nor, imo, does it automatically deny them the ability to express their sentiments about how the show is faring based on summaries and clips posted here.
2) Regarding the Bill/Janice/Mike triangle and it's relative weakness vis a vis other storylines of that time, I remember it. And I understand the point Matt makes about how one set of viewers can harp daily on a single storyline gone bad. But here are two things to consider in this modern era: 1) Back then, that storyline was a relative anomaly. The percentage of really good storylines far outweighed the bad. So people would be more likely to put up with one bad s/l when there were so many others that were going on; and (2) today, people have the choice of watching youtube clips to just follow the pieces they like and can ignore the rest. This is a big problem for ratings and the show hasn't properly recognized or dealt with this tendency. In fact, the way stories are now written in isolation, the writers actually cater to this tendency. Back then, I really didn't consider fast forwarding through Bill/Janice/Mike because not only was it a relative blip in the overall high quality of the show, but also there might be a tie-in to a story I cared about. Today, while some choose not to watch any of the show, a vast number of others catch bits and pieces and skip the rest. I'm curious, do you count them as viewers? Should the ratings people count them as viewers?
3) Even if there are viewers that insist on expressing negative views while not watching (i.e., they "have blinders on"), that still doesn't negate my original point, which is that the show should be trying to find a way to increase viewership by both attracting new first-time viewers (a difficult proposition) as well as bringing back lapsed viewers (a dicey proposition). The only way their ratings will go up is if they pursue one or both of these paths. And my point was that they should be trying to figure out why viewers left in droves and yet linger around message boards to keep up with the show. Doesn't mean they won't have to sift through a bunch of single-issue viewpoints. But, as both of you have mentioned in various ways, there are some overriding and fundamental concerns that have been well-articulated on this and other message boards. The show's PTB would do well to seek them out and take them seriously.
|Interesting/Spoilerish Tweets, Week of 11/19 · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion|