Andy, I disagree about Ben Edlund. I do like Jeremy Carver’s stuff, but Ben Edlund’s previous episodes have been good. In addition to GF, he wrote Malleus Maleficarum, Bad Day at Black Rock (great physical comedy in this one), Hollywood Babylon, Nightshifter (an AWESOME episode which introduced Agent Henricksen), and Simon Said.

Andy, I disagree about Ben Edlund. I do like Jeremy Carver's stuff, but Ben Edlund's previous episodes have been good. In addition to GF, he wrote Malleus Maleficarum, Bad Day at Black Rock (great physical comedy in this one), Hollywood Babylon, Nightshifter (an AWESOME episode which introduced Agent Henricksen), and Simon Said.

Sad to see the lower ratings.

Sad to see the lower ratings.

+ 1 to Jack.

Anyway, I agree with Polly. Supernatural last night was disappointing. I think it’s time Ben Edlund (who wrote Ghostfacers, and also created Bela) needs to start writing a LOT less. He’s simply not as talented as writers like Jeremy Carver (who wrote Mystery Spot).

I’m actually somewhat glad that only 2.27 tuned in. It’s a clear indication to the writers that episodes like this aren’t as appreciated as episodes like Mystery Spot, or Dream a Little Dream of Me, etc.

Next week the ratings should go up, Long Distance Caller looks superb. And Edlund didn’t write it.

+ 1 to Jack.

Anyway, I agree with Polly. Supernatural last night was disappointing. I think it's time Ben Edlund (who wrote Ghostfacers, and also created Bela) needs to start writing a LOT less. He's simply not as talented as writers like Jeremy Carver (who wrote Mystery Spot).

I'm actually somewhat glad that only 2.27 tuned in. It's a clear indication to the writers that episodes like this aren't as appreciated as episodes like Mystery Spot, or Dream a Little Dream of Me, etc.

Next week the ratings should go up, Long Distance Caller looks superb. And Edlund didn't write it.

At least I’m an idiot who knows how to turn off caps lock on my keyboard.

At least I'm an idiot who knows how to turn off caps lock on my keyboard.

Could the fact that the CW programming was pre-empted in Chicago due to the White Sox game be to blame for part of it? And is there any way to find out if it was pre-empted on other major affiliates? I know that pre-emption can’t be to blame for how badly it performed by itself – that there were other factors, including know doubt confusion over “wtf is this and where are Sam and Dean?” by some viewers and disinterest in others – but still I’d like to know how great an impact pre-emptions had on the numbers.

Could the fact that the CW programming was pre-empted in Chicago due to the White Sox game be to blame for part of it? And is there any way to find out if it was pre-empted on other major affiliates? I know that pre-emption can't be to blame for how badly it performed by itself – that there were other factors, including know doubt confusion over “wtf is this and where are Sam and Dean?” by some viewers and disinterest in others – but still I'd like to know how great an impact pre-emptions had on the numbers.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Matt: See, that’s what I think of last night’s show. It was nice to have something fresh and original that they haven’t done before, and when you watch the entire season 3 as a whole, you can also see that it’s a much needed comedic break.

Matt: See, that's what I think of last night's show. It was nice to have something fresh and original that they haven't done before, and when you watch the entire season 3 as a whole, you can also see that it's a much needed comedic break.

I don’t find it incredibly picky! I gave you your extra L back!

I don't find it incredibly picky! I gave you your extra L back!

(Not to be picky, but you’ve dropped one of the l’s in my name, makes me think of an icky fabric now.)

(Not to be picky, but you've dropped one of the l's in my name, makes me think of an icky fabric now.)

And I wonder especially among 12-34 year olds whether there isn’t actually a whole lot more Internet viewing going on that doesn’t get captured by ANYONE because it’s happening OUTSIDE of the network’s own web sites and iTunes and cannot be measured. I always knew this would be a problem, but I am beginning to wonder if it is already more pervasive than we thought.

One key piece of data I don’t have is the PUT last night at 9pm vs. the same night a year ago. If the number of people watching television was the same, we can then fairly attribute all of the bleed of broadcast network television to cable networks. But if it’s smaller, we’d have to attribute at least some of it to…something else.

And I wonder especially among 12-34 year olds whether there isn't actually a whole lot more Internet viewing going on that doesn't get captured by ANYONE because it's happening OUTSIDE of the network's own web sites and iTunes and cannot be measured. I always knew this would be a problem, but I am beginning to wonder if it is already more pervasive than we thought.

One key piece of data I don't have is the PUT last night at 9pm vs. the same night a year ago. If the number of people watching television was the same, we can then fairly attribute all of the bleed of broadcast network television to cable networks. But if it's smaller, we'd have to attribute at least some of it to…something else.

Thetruthhurts – Could we please stop with the personal attacks? If you disagree with their opinions fine, but pointing out your observations on their appearance doesn’t help your argument. (Saying this in the nicest possible way and with all due respect.)

Thetruthhurts – Could we please stop with the personal attacks? If you disagree with their opinions fine, but pointing out your observations on their appearance doesn't help your argument. (Saying this in the nicest possible way and with all due respect.)

As for the HH info — admit it, you’re still going to Zap2it anyway, right? I am not trying to be first, but if I wait until the viewer and 18-49 numbers AND the Zap HH data is published, I will be publishing later than I already am. I don’t see the upside.

I see 95% of the value of these posts being putting the #s in a table that’s very easy to scan and 5% on the analysis — and that may even be giving myself too much credit.

The HH ratings numbers reported here being subject to change would be one thing — but they ALWAYS change. Usually not by much, but they do always change. Given that, do you really see value in including them here?

As for the HH info — admit it, you're still going to Zap2it anyway, right? I am not trying to be first, but if I wait until the viewer and 18-49 numbers AND the Zap HH data is published, I will be publishing later than I already am. I don't see the upside.

I see 95% of the value of these posts being putting the #s in a table that's very easy to scan and 5% on the analysis — and that may even be giving myself too much credit.

The HH ratings numbers reported here being subject to change would be one thing — but they ALWAYS change. Usually not by much, but they do always change. Given that, do you really see value in including them here?

Earl came out of his coma at the end of last night’s show which should return a number of alienated viewers.

Dr. Kelso said good-bye to the show last night and it appears that Dr. Cox will become the new Chief of Medicine – don’t know if that’s good or bad for the show. Most of us liked ‘Coxie’ right where he was.

Earl came out of his coma at the end of last night's show which should return a number of alienated viewers.

Dr. Kelso said good-bye to the show last night and it appears that Dr. Cox will become the new Chief of Medicine – don't know if that's good or bad for the show. Most of us liked 'Coxie' right where he was.

Nessa – I think the reason I hated it besides the completely stupid plot was that the writers wrote that episode for themselves not the fans. If you want to play on someone else’s dime then do it when you have a full season, not when you are coming back from a strike with only four shows to go. It also played into all the critics gripes about the show. (Okay, rant over back to the numbers!)

Nessa – I think the reason I hated it besides the completely stupid plot was that the writers wrote that episode for themselves not the fans. If you want to play on someone else's dime then do it when you have a full season, not when you are coming back from a strike with only four shows to go. It also played into all the critics gripes about the show. (Okay, rant over back to the numbers!)

The HH numbers are very important to me (that’s how and why I started coming here in the first place).

Just make people aware that they are subject to change (unless we can figure out exactly how they come up with the HH – in which case just ‘divulge’ the equation and I’ll crunch my own numbers).

I do see where the HH’s for Lost and WOT seem way out of whack considering the 18/49 and share numbers.

Is it based on advertising dollars per minute in certain age groups or do the networks and sponsors get together to decide what they think a show is worth?

The HH numbers are very important to me (that's how and why I started coming here in the first place).

Just make people aware that they are subject to change (unless we can figure out exactly how they come up with the HH – in which case just 'divulge' the equation and I'll crunch my own numbers).

I do see where the HH's for Lost and WOT seem way out of whack considering the 18/49 and share numbers.

Is it based on advertising dollars per minute in certain age groups or do the networks and sponsors get together to decide what they think a show is worth?

9pm
- 2.473 million viewers
- 1.6/2 HH
- 1.0/3 A18-49
- 1.0/3 A18-34

9:30pm
- 2.069 million viewers
- 1.3/2 HH
- 0.9/2 A18-49
- 0.8/2 A18-34

So about 16% bailed.

9pm
- 2.473 million viewers
- 1.6/2 HH
- 1.0/3 A18-49
- 1.0/3 A18-34

9:30pm
- 2.069 million viewers
- 1.3/2 HH
- 0.9/2 A18-49
- 0.8/2 A18-34

So about 16% bailed.