Damn Twitter and it's 140 character limits! I definitely want to see the rest of the URL Update: full URL was:
TVbytwosetsofnumberstranslatedtocolorcodesubjecttochangependingTVdecisions.com
-
I was off of Twitter yesterday so it wasn't until this morning that I saw a tweet from my friend Jennifer Godwin (of E! Online's Watch With Kristin) that she'd interviewed Community creator and showrunner Dan Harmon and there would be a special treat for us. So I sent back something that prompted the above tweet from Mr. Harmon.
I'm pretty sure Bill will think that's as funny as I do. For the record, while I'm a staunch supporter of the renew-cancel index methodology when it comes to one hour dramas, there are a couple of issues with it (that are generally well-documented at this point, but perhaps could be better documented):
1.) it kinda sucks when it comes to being useful at predicting outcomes for marginally rated sitcoms
2.) results are "point in time"
The Index Just Plain Doesn't Work Well For Sitcoms
The index just plain doesn't work well for predicting fates of the lower-rated sitcoms. Of course it works well for predicting high-rated sitcoms, but that doesn't change the fact that it's lousy at predicting outcomes for sitcoms that aren't high-rated.
Any combination of renewal or cancellation of the lower-rated CBS sitcoms Accidentally on Purpose, Gary Unmarried and The New Adventures of Old Christine is possible. Though my (and I believe Bill's) take is that CBS won't likely renew all three, that thinking isn't influenced much by the math of the index. If Accidentally on Purpose has similar rating to Gary Unmarried in the Wednesday 8:30pm spot, you might be able to accurately predict what CBS announces in May, but it won't be because the index aided you much.
As for NBC, I'm not sure how useful the index is at all this season, for either the one hour dramas or the sitcoms. That has nothing to do with the methodology behind the index, but the methodology behind NBC.
I'll give Dan Harmon credit for consistency. I'd seen some mocking from him before, but now that Bill has changed the status of Community to "Likely to be renewed" (and the color coding to green), he's still mocking!
Bill's logic for the status change is if they already renewed Parks & Recreation, how can they not renew Community which has a more difficult timeslot and better ratings (for the season) than Parks & Recreation? Note: in Thursday's final numbers both shows had a 2.3 adults 18-49 rating.
Though I agree with Bill's thinking (it's logical) I'm not sure how logic driven NBC is at this point. The status change for Community is driven by a renewal for Parks & Recreation. And while I wasn't surprised to see that renewal, the lack of surprise had little to do with what Parks & Recreation's season-to-date 18-49 ratings looked like compared to NBC's average.
The Index Is Point In Time
Because of its point in time nature, the index is far more useful later in the season than earlier. It's like seeing the Denver Broncos win their first six games, but, alas for Broncos fans it's a 16 game season. After week six, Denver, Minnesota, Indianapolis and New Orleans were all undefeated. But only three out of those four teams made the playoffs. The standings were quite useful, even after only six weeks but they weren't perfect at predicting who would make the playoffs.
It's pretty much the same with the index. The index isn't aimed at pissing off TV fans (or showrunners) any more than the NFL standings are aimed at pissing off Detroit Lions fans. Just like the NFL season, as the TV season progresses, things change -- both the ratings for individual shows and the averages for the networks they air on. So there are constantly changes during the season, and corresponding color coding changes. Usually these changes are purely based on math, but particularly with the sitcoms other factors come into play.
Just like ESPN is going to continue to post sports standings from the very beginning of the season, we're going to continue to do the same with the Renew-Cancel Index. And just like sports standings, it will continue to change a lot from the beginning of the season to the end of the season.
Unlike the sports standings though, it's color coded! 
We're always open to suggestions, but for now I'm still leaning towards the shorter TVBTN.com than moving to TVbytwosetsofnumberstranslatedtocolorcodesubjecttochangependingTVdecisions.com.
Industry types look at your index every week so it must be important. It may not predict anything but it gives a lot of people an idea of where they stand with respect to other shows on their network.
Ask him to re-send the comment in 2 or 3 or 4 parts…
Or have a contest to fill in the blank?
Mocking requires reading it first = win!
Although because of the persistence of comments of the “it doesn’t influence anyone” ilk, I think I may have to add something like:
Not intended to influence, just to predict.
To every post.
Erm you can just copy and paste to see the rest of the tweet
Not whats after “pendin” though. if you can, please post it here. thanks.
Jodie’s right! Here’s the entire tweet:
@Seidman I just wondered in my interview why your URL wasn’t TVbytwosetsofnumberstranslatedtocolorcodesubjecttochangependingTV
(I think the “…” is implied.)
” @Seidman I just wondered in my interview why your URL wasn’t TVbytwosetsofnumberstranslatedtocolorcodesubjecttochangependingTVdecisions.com about 3 hours ago from Twitterrific in reply to Seidman”
indeed, that works from Safari (and perhaps IE) it didn’t from Firefox.
TVbytwosetsofnumberstranslatedtocolorcodesubjecttochangependingTVdecisions.com it is!
The cancel index doesn’t really work. If you follow it as a rule one would see that using it could have help NBC to think some of their shows are better than they are and the CBS shows are worse then they are. Any way you look at the index it’s more to talk about then to believ in.
I enjoy Community and now I can see why. Yay for Community and Mr. Harmon!
DanHarmon: @Seidman I tweet a joke about your weird yardstick and you blog 3 pages about the weakness of yards? You’re now red on my “creep index.” 13 minutes ago from web in reply to Seidman
ROFL?
Like NBC, I am now “more colorful”
The argument of “mocking requires reading it first = win” should really be applied in reverse to this entire “article,” since it’s a response to a showrunner’s TWEET, right? This is a ten paragraph essay explaining that the showrunner’s show was never measured correctly because it’s low rated. Maybe call the site highrateddramabythenumbers.com. Or show some class, humor or humility in the face of what seems like some pretty above-the-belt, spot-on mockery.
You’re not entitled to everyone understanding the limitations of your system. You had Community as “in danger of being cancelled” for an entire season of television, with an arbitrary number next to it that apparently meant nothing, because then it turned “green” in response to….parks and rec getting picked up. That’s not TV by the numbers. That’s TV by a variety of unpredictable factors. You got mocked for it. Take it on the chin. This article is a combination of two things: “hey look, TV people read this stuff” and “it’s totally valid!” It’s all defensive, it’s all posturing, and it’s stuff like this that makes everyone mock you all the time. Then the mocking is interpreted as “that means we’re successful.” Yeah. Successful. Like TMZ. Like a circus. The only crime? It says “hospital” above your freak show. It’s a little gross.
By the way, who is “Bill?” Is that your roommate? If your personalities are so fascinating, go be on TV.
BS: Bill is not my roommate. We both run the site, but Bill was the one who came up with the Renew/Cancel index.
I do not interpret the mocking as equaling success and my intent with the post was to disclaim some of the indexes shortcomings. I completely agree when it comes to sitcoms that it’s more “That’s TV by a variety of unpredictable factors.” that was my primary motivation behind the long post, though I can definitely see how that might have been missed with the way I headlined the post.
”@Seidman I just wondered in my interview why your URL wasn’t TVbytwosetsofnumberstranslatedtocolorcodesubjecttochangependingTVdecisions.com about 3 hours ago from Twitterrific in reply to Seidman”
Dang! I couldn’t see the whole thing when I cut and pasted. Curse you, Firefox browser (actually, no, because it’s usually pretty good). Thanks “Me”!
I love Community, too, and Dan Harmon seems awesome.
By the way, the index numbers are not arbitrary at all.
It is the season-to-date adults 18-49 rating for the show, divided by the season-to-date average for the network it airs on. We don’t display all of the underlying numbers primarily due to archiving limitations that would be imposed by Nielsen if we did.
RS: it’s also easy to misinterpret your intent while watching you do a cabbage patch dance in the end zone of attention. You’re more colorful now that someone entertaining is saying “look at the knob?” No way. The only thing accomplished here today is that intelligent, witty, kind-hearted readers like me are now realizing that Community and its genius creator are underdogs that I’d be heroic for assisting every Thursday at 8/7c on NBC.
BS: I’m extremely white, so anywhere I show up in red is much more colorful. But I can see Conan having better luck w/that joke…
I’ve always taken this index as a good rough cut measure of what to expect. It’s not perfect by any means, but there is beauty in its simplicity. You seem pretty open with your methodology and, with the help of some good record-keeping, it is the kind of thing anyone could calculate and verify themselves. It’s not perfect, but like turnover margins in football, it acts as a good bellweather for what to expect. For what its worth, I found Bill and Robert’s analysis of the NBC cancellations last year to be pretty spot on in terms of what was likely to stay.
By the way, I found the Broncos analogy to be cold. After losing a Hall of Fame coach, franchise quarterback, and now quite possibly a Pro Bowl wide receiver in the past 14 months, some of would prefer to use TV to forget about the fortunes and future potential of those Denver Donkeys.
@BSpitt – “No way. The only thing accomplished here today is that intelligent, witty, kind-hearted readers like me are now realizing that Community and its genius creator are underdogs that I’d be heroic for assisting every Thursday at 8/7c on NBC.”
Which incidentally is exactly what having a show “in danger” does. If I was the show runner for a sitcom I’d much rather be in the red than to be declared safe. As anyone who has been on the internet for longer than half a minute should know the internet tends to focus on those shows in danger and ignore those that are seemingly safe. So TVBTN really does Community a service (and I say that as a fan of both the site and the show)
But you probably didn’t realize that since you seem to be nasty, humorless and possessing the mental capacity of a brain damaged circus monkey.