Too Much TV: Your TV Talking Points For Wednesday, January 3rd, 2024
Short TV seasons are okay. Really.
Here's everything you need to know about the world of television for Wednesday, January 3rd, 2023.
SHORT TV SEASONS ARE OKAY. REALLY.
There are certain topics that fall into the sweet spot of easy to write and likely to be shared a lot. Because when you're writing something that plays into readers preconceived notions, you're on your way to creating a clickfest.
One topic that definitely falls into the clickbait category is writing a piece arguing that streaming platforms need to release more original shows with 20 or more episodes. An idea that sounds reasonable at first glance.
For instance, The AV Club's Kaleigh Dray makes that very argument today and I must have had a dozen people send it to me. It's exactly what you would expect, which is either great or terrible, depending on your perspective:
Well, sometimes it would be nice to be able to relax while watching a series, rather than panicking that we’re going to miss a teeny yet oh-so-significant detail in one of those every-second-counts episodes. Because, seriously, every second counts. There’s no time to even glance away, not even to suss out where the bowl of snacks is balanced on the sofa, because that’ll be when a metaphorical Easter egg will roll across the screen. Gah.
This burning desire for a little TV-induced R&R likely comes from the fact that we’ve been eyeball-deep in a nostalgia rut of late. (Yes, we’ve been streaming our favorite ’90s and ’00s series like nobody’s business. What of it?). And, honestly, almost all of these shows enjoy such lovely long season runs, which means that the stakes aren’t always the highest. In fact, you can usually get away with missing the odd episode if you fancy it, because the next episode will always give you a 30-second recap regardless—and maybe even a longer one, depending on how much shit has gone down.
And this just seems like a crazy argument. We want more shows that are casually written and have episodes you can miss if you need to?
But here is the biggest problem with the "shows should have 20+ episode season" argument. People who make it always cite the most successful shows in history as examples of what TV should look like. But Friends or NCIS are not the norm - even on broadcast television. Yes, Seinfeld had a lot of episodes. But so did Coach.
And that's the thing about nostalgia. We tend to best remember the highlights. TV fans wax poetic about the great stand-alone episode of The X-Files. But no one is saying "Oh, remember those four episode of NCIS: Los Angeles when it focused on finding someone a new apartment?"
Streaming TV has a lot of challenges and there a number of things I would change. But the argument for longer seasons is a fun, but pointless dead end.
SPEAKING OF JUNK ARGUMENTS
Apparently I am beginning 2024 in a cranky mood. But I continue to push back against weak arguments and bad metrics because we live in a world where most of what you read in the entertainment press is aggregated from other sites. So one badly-framed piece can end up being aggregated on dozens of other sites. And once readers see a story referenced in enough places, they'll believe the argument, even if it's later disproven.
NextTV posted a piece early Wednesday with the provacative title "Netflix Viewing Declined By 17% in 2023." And as you might imagine, the story has been popping up all over the entertainment news industrial complex throughout the day. In part, because you can never go wrong writing a story that makes Netflix look bad.
The subhead on the story certainly sounds authoritative: "Based on Netflix's own data, viewers spent over 7 billion hours less last year watching the platform than they did in 2022." Wow, based on Netflix's own data? Tell me more!
The comparison was made using data from Netflix's weekly "Global Top 10" rankings. And as you might suspect, that is not exactly the most precise way to calculate total viewing data. Because while it's true that the majority of viewing on any streamer is concentrated in the top titles, there's no way to know what is going on outside of that top ten. And those differences can skew the year-on-year data to the point of being useless.
But there are bigger problems with the comparison, which NextTV admits in the article:
Around the time of our June report, Netflix tweaked its metrics, ranking shows based not on total engagement but on number of "views." This skewed direct YoY comparisons, but the shows that wind up at the top of Netflix's rankings are still those that command the most viewing hours.
So...it would be more accurate to have the headline read "Netflix Viewing Of Top Ten Shows Declined 17% In 2023"?
And then there is this disclaimer:
Netflix wouldn't comment to Next TV on this story. But an individual familiar with company's metrics said that, because the streamer now considers views as the primary qualifier -- rather than watch-time -- the datasets are incomparable.
And while it is true that the new methodology could result in the faulty omission -- or inclusion -- of shows that could skew the data, according to Netflix, over 60% of titles released by the streamer made one of its four weekly top 10 rankers, demonstrating that comparing year-over-year iterations of these lists provides some indicator of how Netflix's overall viewership performance is trending.
Which may be why the article then veers into some word salad discussion about subscriber numbers and password crackdowns. Neither of which would have any real impact on viewing numbers:
“Most of their new subs, especially in the U.S., are from password sharers transitioning to paying subs because of Netflix's account-sharing lockdown,” noted Evan Shapiro, a TMT analyst. “So far, this hasn't increased churn for Netflix. But they did just raise their prices. If their viewing continues to fall, I would expect more subscribers to cancel more often."
But, as the article notes, Netflix is adding subscribers. And if there was indeed a drop in viewing hours, there is no way to know which group of subscribers is leading that change.
These are the stories that frustrate me. Badly framed pieces that hit some viral sweet spot. Suddenly a bad premise is everywhere and once that happens, it's embedded in everyone's memories forever.
ODDS AND SODS
* After a WGA protest, the Television Academy and Fox reversed an earlier plan and returned the Emmy for variety series outstanding writing to the Emmys telecast.
* I'll have more to say about this in the coming days. But it's worth noting that while some networks have been paring back their TV Everywhere apps or shutting them down completely, ABC has added 20 FAST channels to its TV Everywhere app and ABC.com. The channels are free to everyone and while most of them are similar to ones you'll find elsewhere - themed channels built around shows such as Wicked Tuna and Press Your Luck - they've also added a 24-hour-a-day ESPN8: The Ocho. A goofball channel that is tempting enough that I'll have to check it out ASAP.
* I also write a five-day-a-week morning wrap-up of important global TV stories and sometimes I run across random facts I have no space to use. For instance, today I learned that the most watched TV series on the Spanish SVOD FilmIn in 2023 was the show Doctor In Alaska. Which turns out to be an alternative name for reruns of the 1990s series Northern Exposure.
TWEET OF THE DAY
WHAT'S NEW TONIGHT AND TOMORROW
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 3RD:
*Bottom-Tier Character Tomozaki (Crunchyroll)
*Classroom Of The Elite (Crunchyroll)
*Delicious In Dungeon Series Premiere (Netflix)
*I Can See Your Voice Season Premiere (Fox)
*Ishura Series Premiere (Hulu)
*Sistas Season Premiere (BET)
*We Are Family Series Premiere (Fox)
THURSDAY, JANUARY 4TH:
*Barnwood Builders Season Premiere (Magnolia)
*Boy Swallows Universe Series Premiere (Netflix)
*Reyka (Britbox)
*Casey Anthony's Parents Speak: The Lie Detector Test (A&E)
*Daughters Of The Cult (Hulu)
*Delicious In Dungeon Series Premiere (Netflix)
*Dying For Fame (LMN)
*General Hospital: 60 Years Of Stars And Storytelling (ABC)
*Hudson & Rex (UP tv)
*One Night Stay (BET+)
*Reyka (Britbox)
*Sanctuary: A Witch's Tale Series Premiere (Sundance Now)
*Society Of The Snow (Netflix)
*Swamp Mysteries With Troy Landry Series Premiere (History)
*Swamp People Season Premiere (History)
*The Bachelor: The Golden Wedding (ABC)
*The Brothers Sun Series Premiere (Netflix)
*The First 48 Season Premiere (A&E)
*The Power Of Film (TCM)
The problem with your argument defending smaller TV seasons is that it presumes that the best version of TV involves the serialized story arc. You joke about the pointlessness of episodes which slow down or veer away from the all-important reveals and cliff-hangers of some big unfolding uber-narrative. However this was not even something TV did for the first fifty years of its existence -- except maybe on soap operas. Individual episodes stood alone for the most part. The network could (and often did) air them out of shooting order. The viewer could miss a few shows and not feel lost and not need a two minutes spread-sheet of re-cap at the top to jump back in. Shows were designed to be little standalone one act plays with human-sized stakes and complications -- never big manic rollicking plots with the fate of our entire universe and several other quantum universes on the line. The idea of watching a TV show was to bond each week with characters and immerse yourself in their interesting world. If the show survived a few seasons you would naturally get to know these folks better, see new facets and watch them develop a bit as people, but rampaging ever-forward toward some "important" plot culmination was not the priority -- and I think the shows were better for it. The current TV landscape is a frenetic glut of disposable sameness -- "This slick new show didn't grab you? Not to worry. We'll throw another one at you next week, and then ten more the week after that. Anything to keep you engaged." New confusing limited-episode programs constantly thrust at us, many of which undoubtedly started out as unsold screenplays, which got diced into breathless eight-episode sassy slam-a-roos. And if you actually make it to the final chapter of these plot-driven little novels for TV how many actually serve up an ending worth all the bother? I'll answer this one: Not many.
I agree that the piece desiring longer seasons was poorly reasoned. I think I would advocate for "right-sizing" based on the nature of the show and streamer. X-Files is a good example of one show where shorter seasons probably would have benefited the show overall. Of course there are the great standalone episodes, but arguably part of why the mythology became so non-sensical was because 20+ episodes needed to be churned out each year (also, there were a lot of BAD episodes that were standalone).
My argument is that more shows need to consider something like what Slow Horses does. Especially more episodic shows (sitcoms, but also shows like Poker Face) benefit from getting to put out more episodes as that allows writers and viewers to better understand and build relationships with characters. Slow Horses releases its seasons every 6-9 months. My argument is that streamers should look at making some cheaper shows designed to run 6-10 episodes every 6-9 months. The Netflix belief that longer seasons tend to have lower completion rates does not really come into play with that much time in between, but viewers still get greater regularity, which can minimize cost in promotion since viewers are less likely to have forgotten about the show over a shorter time period.