TV Ratings: ABC dances away with Mond...

TV Ratings: ABC dances away with Monday - 'Dancing with the Sta...

There are 17 comments on the Zap2it.com story from Mar 17, 2009, titled TV Ratings: ABC dances away with Monday - 'Dancing with the Sta.... In it, Zap2it.com reports that:

Fast National ratings for Monday, March 16, 2009 ABC waltzed to the top of the ratings Monday as "Dancing with the Stars" followed up its big premiere last week with another heavily watched night.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Zap2it.com.

Hot Pocket

Chicago, IL

#1 Mar 17, 2009
Castle is really doing good for ABC in its second week. Better episode and in line with the premiere ratings.

I think Castle might be a keeper for ABC.
Nicole

Sacramento, CA

#2 Mar 17, 2009
CSI:Miami is desperate and dumb. Writer's have really screwed this up and made it into a soap opera. it's over when they try and get a love story w/characters who were never like that. Fire Cory Miller CBS
Michael

Fort Worth, TX

#3 Mar 17, 2009
Castle is a breath of fresh air. Everyone in my office talks about it. Spread the word!
Fakeem

Washington, DC

#4 Mar 17, 2009
Seems that Heroes and Medium don't rerun well. What a surprise....lol
Susie

Chicago, IL

#5 Mar 17, 2009
Hot Pocket wrote:
Castle is really doing good for ABC in its second week. Better episode and in line with the premiere ratings.
I think Castle might be a keeper for ABC.
Shhh! Don't say that! ABC will probably move it after Lost and screw the ratings up.

I can't believe CBS's comedies fared better than 24. Outrage against Bill Buchanan's death?

Word to CSI: Miami. I stopped watching that show before it got contrived and soapy.
Nicole

Sacramento, CA

#6 Mar 18, 2009
So agree w/you on that Susie about Miami...they writers are horrible. Even CSI Vegas has mantained quality all these years despite maybe some of their stories. They are still in the top 5 after what..9 seasons-wow. Going to have to start watching this "Castle".....
Alan 59

Schenectady, NY

#7 Mar 18, 2009
Susie wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't believe CBS's comedies fared better than 24. Outrage against Bill Buchanan's death?
"Two And A Half Men" always beats "24," even when the comedy is in repeats. The second half hour is variable; "Worst Week" lost more of its lead-in than "Rules Of Engagement" does, so CBS' hour-long average is up. Interestingly, "24" got no bounce from "Heroes" being in repeat mode.
Rena Moretti

Fullerton, CA

#8 Mar 18, 2009
Yes, you read it right... 1.5 rating for Gossip Girl, the show CW is cloning again and again because "everyone's buzzing about it"...
Rena Moretti

Fullerton, CA

#9 Mar 18, 2009
Fakeem wrote:
Seems that Heroes and Medium don't rerun well. What a surprise....lol
I'm more surprised with Medium, which has a format that would tend to re-run better.
Aaron R

Decatur, IL

#10 Mar 18, 2009
I think you'll find that Medium, while blessed with a strong fan base that has been faithful to the show for years, is a difficult show to get into. I doubt the show will find many new viewers even if they keep it on as long as one of the Law & Order shows (not likely). For a procedural, there is a quirkiness to Medium that keeps viewers like me watching (even though that same quirkiness sometimes irritates the hell out of me, especially when the show centers around her annoying middle daughter...I despise that kid like few others on television, even Urkel, and that's saying something), but not everyone can stomach the idea of a woman solving crimes by communing with the dead.

I'd be interested to see how well Medium does when it is shown on Lifetime. Since I don't have the channel in my cable line-up, I have no idea when it's on, but I imagine at least its long-time fans catch older episodes once in awhile.
Lisa

United States

#11 Mar 19, 2009
I can't not imagine why some people watch DWTS instead of the wonderful drama, HOUSE. Hugh Laurie is nothing less than AMAZING and the writing is so good. I just don't understand what the draw is to
DWTS. I'd MUCH rather dance with Hugh!!
Lori

Orlando, FL

#12 Mar 19, 2009
Castle is excellent and glad to see its getting decent ratings. Hopefully will stay around for a long time (though I still wish Firefly was on so that Nathan Fillion wouldn't have been available for it - he is awesome in Castle though!)
Rena Moretti

Rosemead, CA

#13 Mar 19, 2009
Lori wrote:
Castle is excellent and glad to see its getting decent ratings. Hopefully will stay around for a long time (though I still wish Firefly was on so that Nathan Fillion wouldn't have been available for it - he is awesome in Castle though!)
Well, it is losing 50% of its lead-in, which is not what I'd call "excellent".

It may be good enough for ABC's current low standards (as exemplified by Samantha Who's renewal) but "excellent" it is not.
Aaron R

Decatur, IL

#14 Mar 20, 2009
Sorry, Rena, I have to disagree with your lead-in argument. People who watch one show don't automatically stick around to watch the next one. It's why they put channel buttons on remote controls. Back when there were only three networks, with no cable channels from which to choose, many people parked their dials on one station and kept it there (my grandmother, rest her soul, watched the ABC affilliate out of Philadelphia from the time the TV came on at 7 a.m. until prime time, when she might change to CBS when her "stories" came on, like Dallas and Falcon Crest). With more choices now, presuming that a viewer is automatically going to watch the next program in the line is silly. Even the morons who run the networks nowadays know, understand and expect it, even if they don't exactly like the idea. Lead-ins only really matter if the shows in a line-up are either part of a block (such as CBS's Monday comedies) or of a similar genre (NBC's Monday shows). Dancing With the Stars is a game show; Castle is a mystery/procedural. I hate the former types of shows, but enjoy the latter if it's well-made and not CSI:Quebec. Others use the same criteria when deciding whether or not to watch what comes on next.

And as for Lori's remark, I believe she meant that she thoroughly enjoyed the show, which is a subjective statement made upon personal choices and likes, not some ratings-borne comment based on a couple of statistical comparisons. "Excellent" isn't what I would use to describe Castle, either, but it's a pretty good waste of 44 minutes. Better than watching Caruso take his sunglasses off for the 13,336th time, anyway.
Rena Moretti

Fullerton, CA

#15 Mar 21, 2009
Aaron R wrote:
Sorry, Rena, I have to disagree with your lead-in argument. People who watch one show don't automatically stick around to watch the next one. It's why they put channel buttons on remote controls. Back when there were only three networks, with no cable channels from which to choose, many people parked their dials on one station and kept it there (my grandmother, rest her soul, watched the ABC affilliate out of Philadelphia from the time the TV came on at 7 a.m. until prime time, when she might change to CBS when her "stories" came on, like Dallas and Falcon Crest). With more choices now, presuming that a viewer is automatically going to watch the next program in the line is silly. Even the morons who run the networks nowadays know, understand and expect it, even if they don't exactly like the idea. Lead-ins only really matter if the shows in a line-up are either part of a block (such as CBS's Monday comedies) or of a similar genre (NBC's Monday shows). Dancing With the Stars is a game show; Castle is a mystery/procedural. I hate the former types of shows, but enjoy the latter if it's well-made and not CSI:Quebec. Others use the same criteria when deciding whether or not to watch what comes on next.
Mmmm... CSI: Quebec... Let me pass this on to Jerry and Les. ;)

Seriously, I do not disagree with you. Lead-ins are definitely not as important as they once were, but they still do make a big difference in the ratings.

You're entirely right that having a show that is "compatible" is going to get a bigger lead-in (or even lead-out) effect, but it is still the case that shows that lose 50% of their lead-in rate even lower when not in the protective shade of a hit (see Samantha Who?'s ratings history for a good example).

If Castles was to do as well without its lead-in as with, it would join the ranks of OK performers renewed because the networks are afraid they can't do better. In the meantime, losing 50% of the lead-in is not exactly spectacular.
Aaron R

Decatur, IL

#16 Mar 21, 2009
Anymore, I think the networks are happy with any retention (rather like teachers are happy when kids come back from summer vacation still knowing how to spell their own names). Castle fits into the schedule well given the audience of people who watch DWTS. I think those who choose not to stick around change the channel to a known entity (CSI:Miami), rather than risking getting into a new show, only to see it cancelled. This is, of course, the reason why shows like Castle don't last too long, but trying to get an average viewer to break out of a long-held mindset is like trying to move a boulder out of a farmer's field with a toothpick.

Also, not everyone is a fan of Nathan Fillion. Some find him too smarmy to watch for very long, while others would gladly have a beer with him. I'm watching because the actress opposite him played a rather sexy vampire in the most recent Librarian movie. Considering both James Patterson and Steven J. Cannell made guest appearances in the pilot episode, I imagine ABC will probably remember its treatment of Women's Murder Club and cancel Castle before too long, just out of spite.

After all, surely another season of The Bachelor is just what viewers want, ain't it?
Rena Moretti

Fullerton, CA

#17 Mar 23, 2009
Aaron R wrote:
Anymore, I think the networks are happy with any retention (rather like teachers are happy when kids come back from summer vacation still knowing how to spell their own names). Castle fits into the schedule well given the audience of people who watch DWTS. I think those who choose not to stick around change the channel to a known entity (CSI:Miami), rather than risking getting into a new show, only to see it cancelled. This is, of course, the reason why shows like Castle don't last too long, but trying to get an average viewer to break out of a long-held mindset is like trying to move a boulder out of a farmer's field with a toothpick.
Also, not everyone is a fan of Nathan Fillion. Some find him too smarmy to watch for very long, while others would gladly have a beer with him. I'm watching because the actress opposite him played a rather sexy vampire in the most recent Librarian movie. Considering both James Patterson and Steven J. Cannell made guest appearances in the pilot episode, I imagine ABC will probably remember its treatment of Women's Murder Club and cancel Castle before too long, just out of spite.
After all, surely another season of The Bachelor is just what viewers want, ain't it?
You can count me among the Nathan Fillion doubters. I think his casting is actually a detriment to that show.

I think you are completely right that the networks these days play to lose just a little instead of playing to win. They have gotten addicted to their "the internet is stealing our viewers" PR line and can't even seem to be aggressive to regain their audience (except CBS which is up almost 10% year-to-year).

It is puzzling to me because at any given time there are 200+ million potential viewers not watching network programming. It really is a huge target outside is fighting it out with the other networks.

For instance, CBS is doing so well on Tuesday because it has programming that appeals to some of the people who don't watch American Idol. There is a small overlap, but not enough to really hurt AI or NCIS and The Mentalist.

CBS used to have disappointing ratings at 9 and if it had been ABC or FOX would probably have talked about an "impossible task" or something similar. Instead they took more at bats until they found a genuine hit.

It's really simple professional management, but in this day and age it has become remarkable.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gossip Girl Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Pinxton Kirkstead Junior School: Head teacher q... (Feb '13) Aug '15 Umpa 6
News Leighton Meester Sex Tape Uncensored (Jun '09) Apr '15 pressfun 16
News 'Glee' Gets To Work On Reunion Ep: See Heather ... (Jan '14) Jan '14 Michaela 1
Penn Badgley NAKED: Full Frontal NUDE! (Sep '12) Jul '13 GGfan 2
EXCLUSIVE! Chace Crawford Gay Scandal: DICK SUC... (Jun '12) Apr '13 Nate 10
News PR :: Gossip Girl: The Complete Sixth & Final S... (Jan '13) Jan '13 ffting 1
News The CW's 20 hottest women of 2012 (Jan '13) Jan '13 Angelika 1
More from around the web