Plus, magazines don’t put people on their cover based on the buzz. I mean, of course they do, but if the person does not have selling power, they won’t be featured at the cover and that’s it. But Gossip Girl stars were on Nylon, Seventeen, Cosmogirl, Entertainment Weekly, Lucky, Teen Vogue and even Vanity Fair (Blake Lively) so OBVIOUSLY there are REAL people out there watching the show and craving to know more about the cast.

So, I understand what everyone is saying about the ratings. The CW has no excuse for consistently ranking beneath cable stations, but from my own personal experience, something has to be going wrong for them. From what I see, a LOT of people love gossip girl…real people…not hype from a company. It's not just my school either, I've heard identical stories from my friends at different schools. Maybe the fact that I live on the east coast with NY wannabees has something to do with it, and maybe we're (yes, I watched the entire season online illegally this summer…it was actually very entertaining) the only ones watching it, but Nielsen isn't always right in its methods or calculations, so give the CW a break. please? lol

So, I understand what everyone is saying about the ratings. The CW has no excuse for consistently ranking beneath cable stations, but from my own personal experience, something has to be going wrong for them. From what I see, a LOT of people love gossip girl…real people…not hype from a company. It's not just my school either, I've heard identical stories from my friends at different schools. Maybe the fact that I live on the east coast with NY wannabees has something to do with it, and maybe we're (yes, I watched the entire season online illegally this summer…it was actually very entertaining) the only ones watching it, but Nielsen isn't always right in its methods or calculations, so give the CW a break. please? lol

I Like the CW but it goes on about Gossip girl when it ignors shows like One Tree Hill that do better in ratings??

As iv said before, I live in the UK and gossip girl usualy gets around 144.000 viewers for its first showing, and with repeats around 300.000, which really isnt good as its on the number 1 cable channel

If anyone has any other questions about UK ratings, feel free to ask

I checked out the pilot last fall (hey, it was free on iTunes!) and didn’t see the appeal. I happened to be hanging with some friends when a new episode was on in the spring, so I watched it, but it wasn’t much different in quality. Maybe it’s because I’m a 21 y/o guy and not a 12-21 y/o gal, but it wasn’t that good. I’d sooner take another CSI over a trashy soap like that. Then again, I also love Mad Men, which is a bit unusual for my age, but I guess I’ve always been a bit more mature in my interests…

Mad Men I think can be better compared to The Wire (high quality, strong critical reception, slow burn style, low viewer numbers) than Gossip Girl. Even Battlestar Galactica would be a better option.

Ultimately, we can debate the merits and worthiness of these shows, but it comes down to the reactions from the networks themselves; if they’re happy with the ratings or if the critical reception or some other factor is enough to offset performance issues, they get renewed. If not, they don’t.

The only thing that I’ll give you, Robert, is the award distribution. Gossip has 12 Teen Choice noms and no Emmy noms, while Mad Men has 16 Emmy noms and no TC noms. Maybe Mad Men is the Gossip Girl for adults in that respect.

I checked out the pilot last fall (hey, it was free on iTunes!) and didn’t see the appeal. I happened to be hanging with some friends when a new episode was on in the spring, so I watched it, but it wasn’t much different in quality. Maybe it’s because I’m a 21 y/o guy and not a 12-21 y/o gal, but it wasn’t that good. I’d sooner take another CSI over a trashy soap like that. Then again, I also love Mad Men, which is a bit unusual for my age, but I guess I’ve always been a bit more mature in my interests…

Mad Men I think can be better compared to The Wire (high quality, strong critical reception, slow burn style, low viewer numbers) than Gossip Girl. Even Battlestar Galactica would be a better option.

Ultimately, we can debate the merits and worthiness of these shows, but it comes down to the reactions from the networks themselves; if they’re happy with the ratings or if the critical reception or some other factor is enough to offset performance issues, they get renewed. If not, they don’t.

The only thing that I’ll give you, Robert, is the award distribution. Gossip has 12 Teen Choice noms and no Emmy noms, while Mad Men has 16 Emmy noms and no TC noms. Maybe Mad Men is the Gossip Girl for adults in that respect.

Still, Mad Men is much more of a success story than Gossip Girl could ever dream of being. AMC was never known for original series: the CW had lots of publicity for its launch marketing it as the network for teens. Mad Men’s original launch didn’t garner a lot of attention: Gossip Girl was featured on all the major TV sites, shows, and magazines. Mad Men grew by 100% for its second season premiere: does anyone seriously think that Gossip Girl will come back with 6 million viewers? Mad Men had low ratings because no one knew it existed: everyone knew Gossip Girl existed and didn’t care.

I think what annoys me most about the press for Gossip Girl vs. the press for Mad Men is that the CW can’t stop going on and on about what a hit Gossip Girl is, completely ignoring the fact that it doesn’t have any actual data to back up that claim. On the other hand, AMC knows no one is watching Mad Men. Instead of pretending that it is, they market as the “best show you’re not watching.”

Still, Mad Men is much more of a success story than Gossip Girl could ever dream of being. AMC was never known for original series: the CW had lots of publicity for its launch marketing it as the network for teens. Mad Men’s original launch didn’t garner a lot of attention: Gossip Girl was featured on all the major TV sites, shows, and magazines. Mad Men grew by 100% for its second season premiere: does anyone seriously think that Gossip Girl will come back with 6 million viewers? Mad Men had low ratings because no one knew it existed: everyone knew Gossip Girl existed and didn’t care.

I think what annoys me most about the press for Gossip Girl vs. the press for Mad Men is that the CW can’t stop going on and on about what a hit Gossip Girl is, completely ignoring the fact that it doesn’t have any actual data to back up that claim. On the other hand, AMC knows no one is watching Mad Men. Instead of pretending that it is, they market as the “best show you’re not watching.”