Too Much TV: Your TV Talking Points For Tuesday, February 27th, 2024

The tyranny of number-crunching

Here's everything you need to know about the world of television for Tuesday, February 27th, 2024.

THE TYRANNY OF NUMBER-CRUNCHING
It can be tempting to rely on data analysis to determine strategy and answer the complex questions of the entertainment industry. Should most streaming movies receive a theatrical window? What's better - a binge episode release schedule or a weekly episode release?

The soothing thing about using numbers to solve those problems is that on the face of it, numbers are agnostic. They don't care about any of the emotions involved and because numbers don't have a preconceived bias, they in theory provide a more pure and balanced answer to the industry's challenges. 

But there are reasons why none of the major media companies are run by high-level mathematicians. It's because the numbers can only take you so far. They can mislead or be as confusing as any other decision-making process. At the end of the day, some hopefully gifted executive or team of executives has to look at the data collected, weigh it along with other factors, and make a decision. And sometimes that decision will veer far from what the pure numbers will tell you.

As a wildly simplistic example, a streamer could have data that showed a specific actor is extremely popular with its subscribers. Every original project garners solid numbers and even licensed titles featuring the actor do well. So the data would suggest the streamer should greenlight another project. Except there is one fact the data won't tell you. The actor has recently been arrested for sexual assault. Which changes everything.

As I said, that example is very basic, but it highlights the dangers of using data to "prove" things. Numbers are not the answer. They are a useful guidepost, but not the final word.

I have had variations of this discussion a few times with the very talented data analyst Entertainment Strategy Guy and I sometimes get the feeling he either thinks I am trolling him or being purposely dense. I think he does great work and provides some really useful insight into the industry. I recommend his work all of the time.

However, I continue to have concerns that a lot of his readers gloss over the nuances in his data. And that because he is working with subsets of numbers - both publicly and privately reported - he is making some good-faith assumptions based on incomplete datasets. And then there is the challenge every analyst (myself included) has when examining a problem - figuring out what you don't know.

ESG just posted a piece on binging vs. single episode releases and I'm spending a lot of time on it not because I think he's wrong - he's done an exceptional job with the data. But because I wanted to point out where I think people go astray when they read it:

I’m being semi-sarcastic describing this as my favorite topic, since it’s one of the most divisive arguments in the streaming wars. You’re in one camp or another, and no amount of data will change anyone’s mind. This especially applies to Netflix, but possibly to me too, because I’m firmly in the “more shows should come out weekly” camp, and the last two weeks show why.

I'm actually in the "it depends" camp. He's right that Netflix is somewhat in its own category, but especially in the last year or two, streamers are usually a variety of factors to decide whether to binge-release or do a weekly release. And what the viewing numbers tell us about the results of those strategic decisions can quickly get confusing:

Exhibit 1: Echo’s Big Drop vs. Percy Jackson’s Strong Run. Disney released all of Echo’s five episodes in one giant batch the second week of the year, and Echo made the Nielsen charts but dropped off after one week. Overall, that’s a lackluster performance compared to other Disney+ shows.

Although ESG admits that the decision to do Echo as a binge drop might have been a strategic one:

Echo performed worse than Ms. Marvel, which was widely considered a miss two years ago for Marvel Studios.

If I had to make a (cynical) guess, I think this was a marketing move to make sure that Echo wasn’t perceived as another MCU flop. (It was originally scheduled to come out weekly starting on Thanksgiving weekend, one of the biggest streaming viewership weekends each year.) By dropping all the episodes at once, it helped it make the Nielsen charts and avoid bad headlines. If I had to make a more generous guess, I think some streamers believe that likely-to-underperform TV shows won’t benefit from weekly episode releases, so they may as well drop all episodes at once, but I’m skeptical that tactic works.

As it turns out, I happen to have a bit of insight into this. I spoke with several people at Disney about another topic when that decision was being made. And there was a strong sense the show was not going to find the hoped-for audience. And that dragging the release out over several weeks would only highlight the show's weakness for a longer period. 

So someone could look at the two sets of numbers and think "See! A weekly release schedule works better!" But that would overlook the fact that you're comparing a very creatively weak series to one that is arguably the most successful non-Marvel or Star Wars-related original in the history of Disney+. To be clear, ESG provides a nuanced take on this. But I have read a number of pieces that weren't so restrained.

He also writes a lot about the success of the most recent season of True Detective: Night Country and while I could spend a lot of time arguing my case, I'll just note that the biggest advantage the show has is that it's not a pure-streaming original. It has a sizeable HBO viewing base and that provides a lot of marketing incentives to stick with a weekly release schedule.

I did want to point out this paragraph. He mentions the number of recaps spawned by the show and writes this:

One final point: HBO releases its biggest shows on Sundays, which is perfect timing for reporters to write up a recap Monday morning, the first day of the work week. But many/most scripted streaming shows come out on Wednesdays, Thursdays or even (shudders) Fridays. (Again, if you binge release the shows, a Friday release makes the data look better, because folks have more time to watch it immediately, but that doesn’t actually mean that’s the best day to launch a show.)

This is not something ESG would know, because he's not someone who reviews shows or writes recaps. But the various networks and streamers generally provide episodic screeners weeks in advance, so the day the show is released doesn't really impact the number of recaps it inspires. That was certainly the case with Night Country.

All of this is my way of stressing that we all want straightforward answers to life's problems. And TV's problems - like all things in life - are never that simple.

For instance, in today's piece, ESG mentions how annoyed he was that Peacock released season one of The Traitor in a binge release. He notes that season two has been much more successful and it is being released on a weekly schedule. The implication is that Peacock should have released season one the same way. But when you speak with people at Peacock, they'll tell you their decision was driven by the hope the show would build an audience because all the episodes were available. 

In the past, there was some indication that weekly releases of reality shows on Peacock - unless they were a known quantity - had been forgotten. A binge release allowed word of mouth to build, even if it was after the fact. That anticipation wouldn't be reflected in season one's viewing numbers. But during the recent TCAs, a Peacock executive told me the season had a steady influx of new viewers in the almost year since season one ended. The streamer was also informed by the way the audience had built in the UK, which released episodes there in three episodes a week on successive days approach.

As I said, I'm not criticizing ESG's data or the conclusions he draws. I'm just arguing that the pure "this is how many viewers a show had and what that means" metric is extremely helpful. But you should also be aware of what it doesn't tell you.

And that's the question I always ask critics who argue "Why doesn't this streamer do X, it's obvious that's the way to go!" If your solution is indeed seemingly the way to go, then what's important isn't why they aren't making that move. Clearly, they have their own set of in-house analysts who have come to the same conclusion. The question you should be asking is what they are seeing that you aren't. That doesn't mean they're correct. But it does tell you that you need to look at the situation again and try and figure out your blind spots.

I FORGOT TO MENTION THIS YESTERDAY
But over the weekend I wrote a piece laying out my personal TV Critic rules to live by, inspired in part by the famous Roger Ebert column:

It astounds me how many journalists will interview someone and only have the vaguest grasp of the show they're working on. I can't imagine doing it, but the "TV writer who hasn't watched my show" problem is so common, that it's almost become an industry trope. Most pitches from publicists now come with a reminder that you're required to at least watch two episodes of the show before an interview. This is a bit like feeling it necessary to remind a writer that before they can review the newest Ford truck, they should know how to drive.

ODDS AND SODS
* Designer Jeremiah Brent is joining Netflix's Queer Eye as a replacement for the departed Bobby Berk. Brent previously appeared on The Rachel Zoe Project and Home Made Simple. He's been married to Nate Berkus for ten years and the duo previously co-hosted HGTV's Nate & Jeremiah Save My House and The Nate & Jeremiah Home Project

* I do a really bad job of the tried-and-true Hollywood news approach of taking a factoid someone tells you and building a story around it. This brief interview with Chris Carter in The Wrap garnered a lot of attention today because he talked about the ongoing X-Files reboot. He told me the exact same thing last September at PhileFest and I just quickly mentioned it in passing in a newsletter (stupid, stupid, stupid)

* CBS has renewed the daytime drama Young & The Restless for four more seasons, taking it through the 2027 season.

* In the least surprising news of the week, Warner Bros. Discovery has apparently decided against pursuing a merger with Paramount+. Which is a bit like hearing news that the Titanic has decided not to back up and hit the iceberg one more time.

WHAT'S NEW TONIGHT AND TOMORROW

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27TH:
* As We Speak: Rap Music On Trial (Paramount+)
* Chappelle's Home Team – Donnell Rawlings: A New Day (Netflix)
* God Save Texas: Hometown Prison (HBO)
* Pathological: The Lies Of Joran Van Der Sloot (Peacock)
* Shogun Series Premiere (Hulu) - [video: super bowl commercial]
* The Lost U-Boats Of WWII Series Premiere (History)

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28TH:
* American Conspiracy: The Octopus Murders (Netflix)
* Code 8 - Part II (Netflix)
* God Save Texas: La Frontera (HBO)
* God Save Texas: The Price Of Oil (HBO)
* Iwájú Series Premiere (Disney+)
* Iwájú: A Day Ahead (Disney+)
* Survivor Season Premiere (CBS)
* The Impossible Heir Series Premiere (Hulu)
* The Mire Millenium Season Three Premiere (Netflix)
* Vera Season Premiere (Britbox)

SEE YOU ON WEDNESDAY!