Why TV shows are ‘killed’
Our recent articles on two TV shows that were “killed” have prompted some readers to ask, “What are the factors that lead to the cancelation of shows on local TV?”
The simplest and easiest answer would be, “Due to poor TV ratings.” But that would be too simple, because quite a number of programs manage to hang on by the skin of their teeth, even if they aren’t pulling in the huge number of viewers they’re supposed to entice. So, what really gives?
A major consideration, even if a show is good and popular, is if its producer has the “financial legs” he needs to stand on. You see, even if a show has a good number of commercials, it still takes advertisers months to start paying up—so a producer has to have enough money in the bank to keep a show telecasting, until it starts earning its own and making a profit.
Another big factor is the clout that a show’s “backer” has on the network that’s telecasting it. In a fair and objective TV universe, the logic would be, if a show is good, popular and well–founded, it should be “safe.” But actual practice belies that “reality.”
The actual reality is that, like the entire country, TV is a very “personalistic” sub-society, where who you know and has your back is sometimes, even often, your show’s best insurance against cancelation.
This gets a bit dodgy when you factor in the fact that the TV world is a complex warp and woof of intertwining yet sometimes competitive and even outrightly inimical “alliances.” So, your show’s popularity may be good news to some TV people, but definitely bad news for others who may feel threatened by its success—and these two viciously contrary groups could appear to co-exist on the same network!
You would think that all of the network’s personnel would be happy that your show is doing well, but you would be wrong, since other forces within the network’s monolithic structure want their show to be the TV outfit’s sole reigning star.
This could explain why one particular show met its untimely end on TV last year, after a long time on the tube: It was still doing well, but a change of executives resulted in its backer being replaced by a new boss with new cliques and shows to favor, so the long-running program lost out in the mad scuffle, due to lack of support.
Another program was rating well and garnering good feedback, but it, too, ended up on the chopping block because the studio bosses didn’t find its staffers “friendly” enough (translation: subservient to their subjective wishes).
Result: The show’s time slot was changed several times, until its loyal viewers didn’t know for sure how to access the program. Worse, its latest time slot pitted it against a very popular show and it simply couldn’t compete at that intense and heightened level.
After the program’s ratings dipped, the studio’s executives felt justified to “sadly” come to the “objective programming decision” to put the program out of its “misery”!
Lessons learned for program producers, staffers, talents and other personnel: Make sure you have a lot of financial rope (pisi in the trade) to tide you over until commercial sponsors pay up; get to know a channel’s political warp and woof intimately; make sure your backer is well-placed and calls the shots—and you and your show will probably be in for a good, long run!
