Not that I am support of advertiser ageism (if that’s what it is), but it’s a reality.

Ike, I’m not sure if this is the case with CBS’s 20 million shows, like NCIS and The Mentalist.

I’m sure the data is on this site somewhere…

There is no magical 10 million viewer mark. Advertisers don’t care. Right or wrong, they only want demos. Ageist? Probably. But it’s true. Total viewer numbers are almost purely academic. When a CBS show has lower demos then it gets less money from advertisers. WAT is getting old, so it’s getting much, much more expensive. Bringing it back for another season will cost them dearly. It may not be worth these demo ratings.

Can FOX make that into a positive at all?

Also, syndication money has made Scrubs ultimately a bargain to keep. Hell, even if it sucks in the ratings, it will still bring in more people than According to Jim (which is horrible waste of airtime, but cheap).

If the ratings were to drop at a rate of about 2 million a year, in three years it’ll still be getting 19 million on its third Tuesday, which is not normally the highest rated episode anyway. Hardly worthy of cancellation.

Um, ABC is the studio that produces it. Are you saying they had to pay NBC for it? Because that doesn’t sound right to me. And Scrubs is a show that is completely centered around Braff. When he’s gone, it’s a totally different show. At these numbers, ABC won’t be bringing it back under those conditions.

That is if Dawn has a job or network in June. Also teen females are not the biggest spenders, don’t know where you got that.

However, are we sure 90210 will get another season? While it’s getting a lot of hype in the ‘Teen department, it was a show fueled by its parent show, BH90210. That is why a lot of fans of BH90210 started to watch the new version (myself included) but now that the wagon has ran out of fuel and they are getting rid of the original characters, I don’t know where is this show headed.

Really bad writing, inconsistent storylines, and I don’t know (Robert you can correct me if I am wrong) but I think this is the show with most breaks of any show of the 2008-2009 TV season premiering episodes like every 2-3 weeks.

What the CW is not getting in ratings, they are getting in Sponsorship. After all, the target of the show is the biggest spending group in the market.. female teens.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4587219a1860.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/5231334.stm

Not that I really care how shows do internationally, but I’ve read the LOST wikipedia page enough times to find that info and its source (yes, I’m a bit of a geek). There is some proof to that comment. I don’t see why it’s very significant though.

Jared: That does seem to be the case so far. I’m more interesting in the mythology episodes (like the one that focused on the Observer and the ones with the dude that’s sorta like Hannibal Lector). However, I thought the hand coming out of the computer last night was good in the freaky kind of way. I think it’s good stuff.

2) Stop acting as if the fact that you do not know anyone who watches it, is in any way significant! There is nothing wrong with the Nielsen ratings, there is something wrong with the people you know.

3) Nielsen is not a company founded for the sole purpose of sticking it to Pushing Daisies fans! GEEZ.

4) The three most succesful dramas internationally last year were CSI Miami, CSI and House. Lost was never up there, not even in its first season. Where do you people find these numbers???

5) Fringe is doing ok. No more no less. People who are telling you it should probably have more with the hype and the money and the lead in, are not trying to get your show cancelled. Get over it!

I really wish my own TV was working tonight, so I wouldn’t keep bugging you all online .

Plenty of good shows fail in the ratings too. I won’t beat the Jericho horse again here…I’ll use, for example, “Freaks and Geeks (NBC)” and “My So-Called Life (ABC).” Those two dramas were critical favorites that just didn’t find an audience. The lack of audience does not mean the shows were “bad TV.” The networks couldn’t figure out how to handle them.

CBS has had trouble handling Tuesdays at 10pm for a few years now. Sure, those shows may have been “bad TV” by most viewers’ opinions. Still, CBS may have developed some risk aversion due to repeated failures in this particular time slot. CBS is closer to finding something that works now, with WAT, than they’ve been in years. I’ll be very surprised if they risk any changes there for at least one more season.

I’ll have to double-check, but I’m pretty sure WAT was getting comparable-if-not-lower ratings in its previous time slot. Hence, my hypothesis is that WAT was placed in the slot-o-death at a point when death was expected. It’s great news for CBS that such death may be averted. The network will be taking a huge risk by putting anything else there, until WAT drops below the 10 million magic number. I just don’t see CBS as that sort of risk-taker.

Mike G, I totally agree with you regarding WAT. Regardless of its older-skewing demos, WAT is the only series in YEARS to crack the magic 10-million viewer mark for CBS in the Tuesday at 10 time slot. The only way WAT will be canned is if CBS wants to risk a bigger established show – like NCIS – and see if it can hold that timeslot. I highly doubt they’ll risk it. IMHO, WAT was placed in that time slot with full expectation of its demise. CBS did not expect the ratings they are seeing with WAT – and they’re pleasantly surprised, no doubt!

And Holly, thanks for noting that not all fans are bitter . As a Jericho fan, I am not bitter. I do believe Jericho was a great show on the wrong network. Heck, even it’s 6-million viewers for the short second season could be a success on NBC! Cost may have been the true deciding factor on Jericho, IMHO. It cost too much to garner any less than 10MM viewers for CBS.

No need to bash Fringe. Others love the show and I’m one of them.