On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 4:45 PM, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 4:26 PM, televisiongirl > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> FOX's Preston Beckman chimed in on why it failed: >> >> http://maskedscheduler.blogspot.com/2010/09/lone-star.html >> > > I read that this morning. Not too impressed with his analysis (if you can > call it that). He seems to write something like this everytime Fox cancels a > show popular with some critics. He believes that approval from elite critics > actually hurts the ratings of shows with "regular" people. So I guess the > failure is not the fault of Fox executives, but the elite critics whose > praise caused a backlash in the heartland. > > He writes: "This show was problematic but we took the gamble knowing full > well it would either break out or crash and burn....no middle ground here". > He does not give much explanation for what he thought the upside was, though > presumably someone at Fox must have thought it was a decent show to begin > with - indeed, we know the President of Fox thought Lone Star was as good or > better than Mad Men, and would pull major league ratings if marketed > correctly by the geniuses at Fox. But I guess we can just blame that failure > on the critics too. (SNIP) >
Now I see the TVBTN guys have evaluated the implied claim that good reviews by critics hurts a show's ratings: http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/10/01/do-tv-critics-have-an-effect-on-tv-ratings/66082 Short Answer: Bullshat. The correlation between metacritics scores and adjusted ratings was -.09. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
