Timeslot matters for the soaps! And so does culture

I put this on SON today, as part of a thread focusing on a montage of UK soaps.

But, this little bit of timeslot research explains a lot, I think.

The US appetite for the daily serial format (which is dying). BBC America quickly cancelled Hollyoaks. We see no attempt to bring EastEnders or Coronation Street to the US (although the latter flourishes in Canada).

Americans predated the rest of the western world in women in the workplace (I'm not counting the former Communist countries), in fast food, and in the demise of communal activities (like bowling leages). It's go-go-go. It's work interfering with family time. It is parents and children not eating dinner together. It's microwave food.

Into that climate, there is NO WAY to slip in a daily soap or two. Most families--AND ESPECIALLY THE TARGET WOMEN--simply have ZERO capacity.

The rest of the world still has a higher proportion of at-home women (the social systems still encourage stay-at-home moms), there still less of a culture of Macdonalds and its' ilk, plus many of these shows are broadcast at more congenial times of the day.

===========================

Let's start with the UK.

Today's listings say that Eastenders will appear on BBC1 at 8 pm! PrimeTime.

ITV1 shows Corrie at 7:30 pm and 8:30 pm. This is preceded by Emmerdale at 7 pm.

Channel 4 shows Hollyoaks at 6:30 pm.

Channel 5 shows Neighbors at 5:30 pm followed by Home and Away at 6 pm.

Look at the implications of this. FIRST, you can watch the full lineup after the work day (ignoring time shifting). This encourages intergenerational soap watching in real time. Basically, in the "pre-watershed" time periods, families can watch soaps together.

But look too at how the channels basically work together to make sure the soap viewer can watch an unbroken series of programs from 5:30 pm on WITHOUT COMPETITION.

5:30 - Neighbors
6:00 - Home and Away
6:30 - Hollyoaks
7:00 - Emmerdale
7:30 - Coronation Street
8:00 - Eastenders
8:30 - Coronation Street

Not only do I believe the culture allows this (families are still more home-based, there is still more intergenerational residence), but the scheduling supports this.

===========================

Now, let's switch to Germany.

11:15 am, ZDF, Reich und Schoen (Bold and Beautiful)
5:30 pm, RTL, Unter uns
6 pm, ARD - Verbotene Liebe
6:25 pm, ARD, Marienhof
7:05 pm, RTL, Alles was zaehlt (rebroadcast the next morning)
7:40 pm, RTL, Gute Zeiten, schlechte Zeiten (rebroadcast the next morning)
2:25 am, ZDF, Schatten der Leidenschaft (Young and the Restless).

Germany is still even more ingrained in the woman-at-home culture. Still, they schedule their Bell soaps for "off hours" (and the ratings ain't great), but their core shows are in that early-evening slot.

Hmmmm...lessons to be taken?

===========================

Well, what about Canada. That shares a border with the US. What do they do?? Let's focus on the biggest market, Toronto:

1 pm, A-Channel, All My Chidren
1 pm, Global, Days of Our Lives
1:30 pm, CTV, The Bold and the Beautiful
2 pm, Global, As the World Turns
2 pm, A-Channel, One Life to Live
3 pm, CTV, General Hospital
3 pm, Global, Guiding Light
4:30 pm, Global, The Young and the Restless

And, guess what the number one show is?? Y&R! Hmmmm...could timeslot matter? Could absence of timeslot competition matter.

This is all so obvious to me. But there is a misogyny in US programming that has resisted migrating these shows to primetime. And we see the consequence....

Edge of Night...and a segue into the telenovela as the future of serials

Usenet's "Robbie" wrote that she wished GL would be cancelled, and they'd bring back Edge of Night. The sublime "Michael/Rthrquiet" responded excellently with his post (see it here).

One of the light bulbs he set off in my mind with his post was that Edge failed EVEN THOUGH IT HAD General Hospital as its lead-in during GH's peak ratings! Now that is failure! Failing to hold on to a lead-in like that truly suggests the audience for your show isn't there.

Well, this all inspired my ramble below :-).

Wow, Michael, I forgot about that.

So, when did EON move from CBS to ABC? I remember watching that move and, honestly, not being grabbed by Edge. I assume the show was already in descent.

But, yes, if GH was the lead-in AND Edge had decent clearance rates, the inability to hold on to the lead is quite telling.

(But I seem to recall that my Buffalo affiliate didn't run Edge at 4 pm...they ran Phil Donahue...so I'm guessing that happened a lot and partly explains why Edge didn't get the viewers).

It is especially ironic, because that 4 pm EST timeslot COULD have been gold. As we have discussed here before, part of the success of Y&R in Canada is that it airs (depending on time zone) in the 4 pm to 6 pm time range. So, it is a show that people can catch after work, and watch as a family. It is something I dearly love, when I return to Canada: Watching day-ahead episodes with my clan.

That should have worked for Edge too. (Indeed, the book I have been reading says the late time slot was part of EON's success on CBS...it had one of the highest proportions of male viewers, drawn to the Perry Mason-style narrative of the early years).

So, that may be a perfect example of a show that simply aged out of viability...By the 80s, Perry Mason and its' ilk was not generally popular in primetime either. Justice shows didn't really rebound until the Law and Order franchise.

Michael then says "The mind boggles at who might be tapped to be headwriter, since I believe the phenomenal Henry Slesar (whom the idiots in charge fired for the show's last two years or so anyway) is no longer with us. Megan McTavish, maybe? Oh, no, I know who they'd get: James E. Reilly. Oh, yeah. That's *exactly* who the current loonies would think would be right for EDGE. Oh. My. God. I think I want to puke.

Well, now, I'd like JJ Abrams. Seriously...someone with that pedigree. A Michael Malone style (i.e., accomplished, critically and commercially successful) detective fiction writer.

At their peak, detective mystery novels are the best. Not only is the crime puzzle interesting, but the best writers always show us the inner workings of their investigator. It is that compelling investigator that spins off these "franchise" series, where the detective keeps coming back. Agatha Christie understood that.

On TV right now, BBC's Wire in the Blood is a perfect demonstration of how it should be done. That show isn't a serial, but the detectives' (plural) haunted inner lives are throughlines that link each episode.

Michael then says:

There are some things that are better left a memory than trotted out again so the current soap vampires can suck all the life out of them and then piss all over them. EDGE is one of them.

Vampires is a perfect segue: Dark Shadows didn't fare too well in its' 80s primetime revival, did it? That show is a perfect demonstration. It was cheesy, and part of its' appeal was cheesiness. That was good for a 2-3 year lifespan before ratings started to plummet.

So, do all these shows HAVE to last 50 years? No! What's the matter with 2-3 great years, and then we move on.

More and more, I'm feeling that the super-annuated nature of the daytime form is part of what is killing it...the burden of history just gets too heavy and cumbersome.

The best primetime shows are those that have a defined lifespan. My favorites are the HBO shows, with their clear 5-season 13-episode/season arcs. They shine brightly, they are coveted as brief jewels, and then they disappear. Even in primetime, the longest shows usually last 5 or 7 seasons...and then we have our memories of greatness.

I had hoped that the telenovela would take off in the US, but MyNetwork certainly didn't do well with adapting Latin American style programs. But I still think that could be a very good format on the right network, with the right promotion and creative force.

So, a detective style telenovela could work great...say for a planned six month season. If the detectives took off, they could be revisited a year later, after a rest. Of course, this would not work in daytime anymore...and I believe it would not work as a DAILY serial anymore. Those aspects of the genre are dead.

I think part of the reason the serial reality shows (American Idol, Survivor) thrive is because they require a thirteen week commitment, and then you get a rest, and then you revisit the franchise but with some fresh 'characters". I think that is the new reality...and and that is what soaps need to evolve into.

Much as I love my soaps, I really think the secret to renaissance is to start over. I'd even be open to--after a rest--trying to move one of the existing soaps into a true telenovela format for limited runs.

IN THAT SENSE, though he is vilified, I think Brian Frons' attempt to do Night Shift--and his apparent limited success with it (peak ratings for SoapNet, if the hype is to be believed)--is an excellent demonstration of the way of the future.

I'd love to visit some Y&R characters in primetime on Soapnet for 13 weeks a year...