David Kronke was appointed Mayor of Television after a bloodless coup in 2000. Since then, he has improved infrastructure, championed greater educational opportunities and fought for reforms that have utterly erased corruption and incompetence from the television industry. Since Mr. Kronke has ascended to power, Television is a far better place. Warning: Academic study/market research stuff ahead
A SmithGeiger Report released yesterday (aw, c'mon, don't give up on this already!) found that repeats of old broadcast-network TV series represent a compelling reason for viewers to sample original programming on cable channels. While this sort of seems self-evident, we now have piles of numbers to pore over underscoring the verity.
72% of the 1,500 respondents between the ages of 16 and 54 say that when they turn on their TV, they tune into either a favorite channel or a specific program. An additional 25% go directly to an on-screen scheduling guide or their TiVo. Which suggests that channel-surfing isn't as prevalent as one might imagine, because people are clearly looking for something specific. And when people do surf - again, somewhat predictably - they'll stop when they come upon a familiar program.
By a margin of 52% to 48%, viewers are more likely to tune to a cable channel first. The nights when they're more likely to go to a broadcast network are Sundays (when "Desperate Housewives" is on), Tuesdays ("American Idol," "House," "NCIS," "The Unit," "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit") and Thursdays ("CSI," "Grey's Anatomy").
When people turn on a broadcast network, 58% said they do so to see a new episode of a show; 37% said the same thing about cable. But only 21% select broadcast if they want to see old episodes, while 69% turn to cable. 83% said they prefer cable channels that present some mix of original programming and off-network reruns.
Log-rolling is involved when network shows go to cable - the network shows boost the cable channel's profile, obviously, and coax viewers into therefore sampling the channel's original offerings. But the show itself can see its profile raised, and its ratings on its original network can rise, as well. 55% of those who first see a network show on cable are more likely to check it out on the broadcast network. (The study offers "24" and "Gilmore Girls" as series whose network runs improved after episodes appeared on cable.)
So: What this is saying is that despite all the hand-wringing of recent years, the networks are still vital and influential entities. And, in fact, cable channels are extremely reliant upon network programming to elevate their profile and their programming.
So it behooves the whole house of cards that is the TV industry that broadcast-network programming continue to flourish, because the trickle-down theory has it helping cable, as well.
What the study doesn't address is what might happen as the networks produce fewer big hits. Of all the new shows this season, only "Heroes," "Ugly Betty" and maybe "Shark" and "Sons & Daughters" appear to have a future that will allow them to build up enough episodes to ensure long cable runs of the sort that will help cable networks beyond just filling air time.
More pressingly, most of the series cited in the study as having high recognition from viewers and being effective in luring viewers to cable were sitcoms, and we all know how the sitcom is faring these days. How will having fewer new hit shows to bring viewers to broadcast networks and then to cable affect the whole industry? Is TV's future one of pure nostalgia?