The Book of Daniel: Ignored by advertisers (and audiences)
The New York Times reports that the controversial new NBC series "The Book of Daniel" was pretty much boycotted by many advertisers (and five network affiliates) for its two-hour season debut last Friday. This is an interesting piece because it gives some insight into what networks do when advertisers annd sponsors bale on a program. The religious subject matter--very touchy for Americans--resulted in low advertiser turnout,
- despite lower prices for the spots, which reflected a week's worth of media attention devoted to complaints from the American Family Association about the contents of the program. The complaints led 5 of NBC's 232 affiliates to pre-empt the series last Friday; in one market, Little Rock, Ark., the local WB affiliate ran it instead. The series "touches on something that our society, and Madison Avenue, are not ready for," said Joe Mandese, editor of MediaPost, an online and print trade publication. "Religion is the ultimate taboo topic."
At a time when the network is losing more and more viewers to cable, NBC is hoping that the controversial drugs-and-alcohol story lines involving the Episcopal minister's dysfunctional family "will appeal to younger, educated and affluent viewers who prefer their TV programs with an edge." But advertisers still don't like these shows when they're on the big networks. And apparently ratings were low as well, with only 9 million viewers tuning in to "The Book of Daniel."
Overall, last week's ratings saw ABC on top for the first time this season, thanks to three big bowl games (the Orange Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, and the electrifying National championship Rose Bowl game, where Texas just edged out USC). Ballroom dancing also helped ABC, which broke CBS's season-long, 15-week winning streak.
posted by hdougie at 1/11/2006 09:37:00 AM
6 Comments:
I was very intrigued when I heard this story on the radio last week. I was almost shocked to find that advertisers are still listening to the public’s views on the media. I believe that the majority of Americans are, or used to be, uncomfortable with some of the things aired on television; they have become accustomed to seeing these things and have thus become almost immune to their emotions. The people of this nation do not often stand up and let the media know that they do not agree with what is being shown. It is very evident from the lack of commercial air time sold during the season debut of “The Book of Daniel” that the public does not approve of this show and they are undoubtedly letting the media know. It is about time the public stand up for what it believes instead of letting the media dictate what beliefs will be depicted through its venues. In a nation characteristic of democracy it is common sense that the people should control what is shown via the media.
Jenni Rowe
I believe that the whole "politically correct" thing is getting out of hand. I think that it has gone too far. I do not think that it is necessarily the public's fault that the show did not get much commercial air time. The advertisers are just playing it safe. They going belly up for the few critics and radical people who believe that you should be saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" and things of that nature. Ultimately, the media is affecting the decisions of most people. While the TV series seems small and not significantly important... what about other matters? But really who is to blame? It's the not the media persay because the public is controling it...
Kim Veley
I don't think that it is necessarily the religious matter involved that is driving the people away... it's the aberration from traditional plot or standardized writing/production style. If Jesus was just represented in some monologue by Daniel as he churned out a solution while leaning on religious teachings in a church or in a study decorated with pieces depicting or eluding to Jesus this would rub far fewer “benevolent” watchdog groups the wrong way, thus getting more sponsors and inspiring NBC to promote it more and/or in a better way. After all, they don’t promote one of their best shows, Scrubs, as they reap little profit from it since it’s a joint venture with a Disney –owned company, so it’s obvious that it takes a lot for NBC or any network to promote something that will bring in little profit…and then there’s the thought that maybe they didn’t want a to push a show that really wasn’t that worthwhile...might be a bit embarrasing. They don't have the ability to fund and promote mediocre to poor shows on level of the likes of CBS and then weather the fallout of the critical consencus.
Scott Morrison
ok, i can't resist.my last comment was only part of what i wrote to begin. i just can't let myself drop the arguement (here's to being stubborn) until i get the rest on. here....
_____________________________________
There is an episode of the classic series M*A*S*H where the character Dr. Sidney Freedman writes a letter to Sigmund Freud. “Dear Sigmund” sees a military psychiatrist, the one person whose sanity is a) taken for granted and b) required so as to keep everyone else chipper and ready to go do insane things, at the end of his mental rope. As a remedy he sits and writes an extended letter to the deceased father of his trade. I remember my parents and others of their generation telling me how the show was unthinkably brash and even wrong to do that back then. It was something new and upsetting in television, as is this next step present in Daniel.
I should stop talking about the glory days of M*A*S*H, they always steal the show, but I feel the family values groups who are so obviously out of touch with the real world counterparts to their imagined units of moral and physical sanctity are simply reacting to a series simply trying new things. I have a feeling most Americans are not against this program for such a newfangled idea as a priest speaking to Jesus (is Daniel not a catholic priest, and were/are the priests in Catholicism not the required conduit to the word/advice/forgiveness of god?). The public didn’t tune in, but what reason did they have to do so? It’d already been skewered by groups that are at best hasty in their damnations, and beyond the concept, the show kinda-sorta wasn’t very good. It was accessible, so it doesn’t fall in with Arrested Development or other freer thinking shows, but it wasn’t well acted or written. It failed ultimately because it’s just another half baked new show on NBC.
long windedly yours,
Scott Morrison
so he's episcopalian, my mistake..
scott
I was wondering how this was all going to pan out..
My roomate and I were watching TV one night, probably sometime before winter break, when a commercial for this show came on. We were stunned. A sitcom about a minister and his disfunctional family - not a big deal. But to add Jesus in as a character? Hillarious. The only problem, the commercial ended stating it was on Friday nights. Let's face it, if it is targetting high school and college aged viewers, this time slot is a huge mistake. I don't know if I would have actually liked this show, or if it would have been something my friends and I watch once for a laugh, but the fact that it premiered on a weekend night definately hurt it's chances of being picked up.
Lindsay Parker
Post a Comment
<< Home