|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Dec 9, 2017 1:16:24 GMT
Consider this a sister thread to masterdoctor's 'negative reactions to 13'. As Jodie's time nears, and fan reaction will heat up again, I think there's something that needs to be addressed: Demographics change. Notice, a lot of terms like 'real fans' or 'hardcore fans' or 'you owe us' get thrown around by sectors of fandom. These are people who believe that their contiinued support of the programme makes them the priority audience, and that they are the one and only lfie blood of the series. If they go, it's over. My simple question is thus: do they think that every person who watched Who in 1963 was still watching in 1973, let alone 1983? Did every person who watched Hartnell hang around until McCoy, never mind Eccleston and Tennant? I hope not. Here's the thing fandom never wants to hear: it's replaceable. Audiences change and new ones can fill in gaps, if and when, they come up. Every major franchise has had to do this at some point: clear the cobwebs to let in new life. I guarantee that less than a fraction of the 8 million plus who tuned in to 'Rose' in 05 were veterans, for example. Most of Tenant's lauded viewing figures: will bet money many were kids and casuals. Capaldi's era, whether you like him or not, has seen a decline in ratings, and regular criticism of being too insular, too concious of fandom and the classic series. It's lost the casual audience and, more importantly, new blood. NuWho cannot rely on its fans to sustain it: it needs more people, specifically, more young people. Big Finish is a small company, and thus can afford to cater just to us. The TV show cannot. Whether you like Jodie or not, she's created a response; people are curious now. They want to know. Just look at this DeviantARt result for 13 fanart: www.deviantart.com/tag/13thdoctorThere are people who respond to her and want her. Remember the reaction videos of little girls being excited at her announcement that went viral? These people are who we need most right now, if we want the show to survive. We as a fandom have to be mature enough, wise enough, responsbile enough, to know when it's time to let someone else have their go on the swings. Does that mean you have to like Jodie or watch Series 11? No, but can we stop with the missplaced 'ownership', and stop pretending we're the only ones who ever mattered?
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Dec 9, 2017 14:50:46 GMT
As Jason pointed out in the 'negative reactions' thread, the BBC are a domestic broadcaster. How well the show does abroad is not their priority (frankly, there's a bit of legal iffiness if the Beeb should even be selling their content abroad, cause license fee payers).
I bring this up to address non-UK fans who have declared any type of 'boycott' or 'I'm leaving the show': The BBC could not care less. You ain't a fee payer, and you ain't in the Home Counties. Your hollow threats literally make no difference to the decision-makers, and certainly not to Chibnall.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Dec 9, 2017 15:05:18 GMT
As Jason pointed out in the 'negative reactions' thread, the BBC are a domestic broadcaster. How well the show does abroad is not their priority (frankly, there's a bit of legal iffiness if the Beeb should even be selling their content abroad, cause license fee payers). I bring this up to address non-UK fans who have declared any type of 'boycott' or 'I'm leaving the show': The BBC could not care less. You ain't a fee payer, and you ain't in the Home Counties. Your hollow threats literally make no difference to the decision-makers, and certainly not to Chibnall. If foreign viewers stop watching, the foreign channel won't buy the show from the BBC. The BBC won't make any money from overseas sales. Their 'boycott' isn't hollow
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Dec 9, 2017 15:12:40 GMT
As Jason pointed out in the 'negative reactions' thread, the BBC are a domestic broadcaster. How well the show does abroad is not their priority (frankly, there's a bit of legal iffiness if the Beeb should even be selling their content abroad, cause license fee payers). I bring this up to address non-UK fans who have declared any type of 'boycott' or 'I'm leaving the show': The BBC could not care less. You ain't a fee payer, and you ain't in the Home Counties. Your hollow threats literally make no difference to the decision-makers, and certainly not to Chibnall. If foreign viewers stop watching, the foreign channel won't buy the show from the BBC. The BBC won't make any money from overseas sales. Their 'boycott' isn't hollow A valid point, but my line was more 'The big decisions (like the lead actor or showrunner) are dictated by British Viewers, not foreign ones'.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Dec 9, 2017 15:17:09 GMT
If foreign viewers stop watching, the foreign channel won't buy the show from the BBC. The BBC won't make any money from overseas sales. Their 'boycott' isn't hollow A valid point, but my line was more 'The big decisions (like the lead actor or showrunner) are dictated by British Viewers, not foreign ones'. If DW loses overseas sales, and the BBC needs the money, changes would happen. So, in a roundabout way, the overseas viewers can affect the DW decisions. What if overseas countries don't want a female lead? They decide to stop buying the show. That would bound to affect any future casting decisions.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Dec 9, 2017 15:25:59 GMT
A valid point, but my line was more 'The big decisions (like the lead actor or showrunner) are dictated by British Viewers, not foreign ones'. If DW loses overseas sales, and the BBC needs the money, changes would happen. So, in a roundabout way, the overseas viewers can affect the DW decisions. What if overseas countries don't want a female lead? They decide to stop buying the show. That would bound to affect any future casting decisions. Again, not an invalid sentiment, but the BBC aren't like other broadcasters: their money primarily comes from the License fee, rather than ad space and breaks like say ITV (and the BBC even making any additional money off their shows is something of an issue of contention in TV circles, but that's so much red tape and legal jargon that I doubt any really careds about). Who pays the License fee? The British public, hence, they're the first port of call when deciding what programmes do and don't get renewed. They're the meat and potatoes of the business: foreign is gravy. I've yet to hear of a BBC show kept alive by the BBC themslves (rather than being passed to someone else, like Ripper Street) by foreign sales if it died domestically.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Dec 9, 2017 15:29:33 GMT
If DW loses overseas sales, and the BBC needs the money, changes would happen. So, in a roundabout way, the overseas viewers can affect the DW decisions. What if overseas countries don't want a female lead? They decide to stop buying the show. That would bound to affect any future casting decisions. Again, not an invalid sentiment, but the BBC aren't like other broadcasters: their money primarily comes from the License fee, rather than ad space and breaks like say ITV (and the BBC even making any additional money off their shows is something of an issue of contention in TV circles, but that's so much red tape and legal jargon that I doubt any really careds about). Who pays the License fee? The British public, hence, they're the first port of call when deciding what programmes do and don't get renewed. They're the meat and potatoes of the business: foreign is gravy. But, you are forgetting about the backlash in the UK. There already is one. If series 11 has poor scripts, the backlash could intensify.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Dec 9, 2017 15:41:40 GMT
Again, not an invalid sentiment, but the BBC aren't like other broadcasters: their money primarily comes from the License fee, rather than ad space and breaks like say ITV (and the BBC even making any additional money off their shows is something of an issue of contention in TV circles, but that's so much red tape and legal jargon that I doubt any really careds about). Who pays the License fee? The British public, hence, they're the first port of call when deciding what programmes do and don't get renewed. They're the meat and potatoes of the business: foreign is gravy. But, you are forgetting about the backlash in the UK. There already is one. If series 11 has poor scripts, the backlash could intensify. And I don't dispute that. In fact, I've said so on multiple occassions. The point of this thread is to state that fandom is not the final word on anything, and the show's long term survival has to go beyond them.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Dec 9, 2017 16:30:54 GMT
But, you are forgetting about the backlash in the UK. There already is one. If series 11 has poor scripts, the backlash could intensify. And I don't dispute that. In fact, I've said so on multiple occassions. The point of this thread is to state that fandom is not the final word on anything, and the show's long term survival has to go beyond them. If fandom stops watching, they may have the final word.
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Dec 9, 2017 16:36:59 GMT
And I don't dispute that. In fact, I've said so on multiple occassions. The point of this thread is to state that fandom is not the final word on anything, and the show's long term survival has to go beyond them. If fandom stops watching, they may have the final word. Agreed but only if its on a Global scale.
Regards
mark687
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Dec 9, 2017 16:46:54 GMT
If fandom stops watching, they may have the final word. Agreed but only if its on a Global scale.
Regards
mark687
Ohh, no, no, no. If it's a failure in the UK, there would be drastic changes, or cancellation.
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Dec 9, 2017 16:59:52 GMT
Agreed but only if its on a Global scale.
Regards
mark687
Ohh, no, no, no. If it's a failure in the UK, there would be drastic changes, or cancellation. I don' know it could drop to 1-3 million a week in the UK but if its Worldwide audience were still 20 million or so it would still keep going (with changes I agree after all isn't that what's happening now almost?)
Regards
mark687
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Dec 9, 2017 17:04:52 GMT
Ohh, no, no, no. If it's a failure in the UK, there would be drastic changes, or cancellation. I don' know it could drop to 1-3 million a week in the UK but if its Worldwide audience were still 20 million or so it would still keep going (with changes I agree after all isn't that what's happening now almost?)
Regards
mark687
To a point yes, though like Ripper Street, if it sunk that low domestically it could be handed off to someone else more attuned to the international market. Not saying I want Who to become an Amazon or Netflix exclusive, but it's something to noodle.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Dec 9, 2017 17:11:06 GMT
I don' know it could drop to 1-3 million a week in the UK but if its Worldwide audience were still 20 million or so it would still keep going (with changes I agree after all isn't that what's happening now almost?)
Regards
mark687
To a point yes, though like Ripper Street, if it sunk that low domestically it could be handed off to someone else more attuned to the international market. Not saying I want Who to become an Amazon or Netflix exclusive, but it's something to noodle. I can't see the BBC completely cancelling the show. Perhaps, a rest for a rethink. They may contract it out, but still retain certain rights. I don't know who owns the rights to Ripper Street.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 17:32:22 GMT
Again, not an invalid sentiment, but the BBC aren't like other broadcasters: their money primarily comes from the License fee, rather than ad space and breaks like say ITV (and the BBC even making any additional money off their shows is something of an issue of contention in TV circles, but that's so much red tape and legal jargon that I doubt any really careds about). Who pays the License fee? The British public, hence, they're the first port of call when deciding what programmes do and don't get renewed. They're the meat and potatoes of the business: foreign is gravy. But, you are forgetting about the backlash in the UK. There already is one. If series 11 has poor scripts, the backlash could intensify. Remind me where this backlash is again? A few people on forums? Some angry tweets? Meaningless in real terms. Sadly these type of people do think their opinion is really important.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on Dec 9, 2017 17:33:16 GMT
But, you are forgetting about the backlash in the UK. There already is one. If series 11 has poor scripts, the backlash could intensify. Remind me where this backlash is again? A few people on forums? Some angry tweets? Meaningless in real terms. Sadly these type of people do think their opinion is really important. Ohh, dear!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 18:54:57 GMT
Remind me where this backlash is again? A few people on forums? Some angry tweets? Meaningless in real terms. Sadly these type of people do think their opinion is really important. Ohh, dear! Care to elaborate? Or even answer my query please.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Dec 10, 2017 0:24:55 GMT
Consider this a sister thread to masterdoctor's 'negative reactions to 13'. As Jodie's time nears, and fan reaction will heat up again, I think there's something that needs to be addressed: Demographics change. Notice, a lot of terms like 'real fans' or 'hardcore fans' or 'you owe us' get thrown around by sectors of fandom. These are people who believe that their contiinued support of the programme makes them the priority audience, and that they are the one and only lfie blood of the series. If they go, it's over. My simple question is thus: do they think that every person who watched Who in 1963 was still watching in 1973, let alone 1983? Did every person who watched Hartnell hang around until McCoy, never mind Eccleston and Tennant? I hope not. Here's the thing fandom never wants to hear: it's replaceable. Audiences change and new ones can fill in gaps, if and when, they come up. Every major franchise has had to do this at some point: clear the cobwebs to let in new life. I guarantee that less than a fraction of the 8 million plus who tuned in to 'Rose' in 05 were veterans, for example. Most of Tenant's lauded viewing figures: will bet money many were kids and casuals. Getting back in line with the OP after detouring on ratings, of course there isn't a one-size-fits-all answer: not everyone who dislikes Jodie is a sexist, and not everyone who wants her is a brainwashed femininazi. Ideologues are bad, no matter what end of the political spectrum they're on, and that reductive approach kills discussion, the lifeblood of fandom. Nonetheless, the pro-side isn't really doing much. The anti-crowd are really the ones trying to fan flames and the BBC and Chibnall's approach is denying them that oxygen. Even then, what tends to be lost is, well, the kids: they don't have the baggage we do. They can come to Jodie with new eyes, and it'll be itneresting to hear them in ten years.
|
|
|
Post by Jeedai on Dec 10, 2017 0:32:34 GMT
If foreign viewers stop watching, the foreign channel won't buy the show from the BBC. The BBC won't make any money from overseas sales. Their 'boycott' isn't hollow My guess is BBC America isn't worried about boycotts. Orphan Black lasted five years, so they already have a viewership that's happy to watch a female-led Scifi show.
|
|
|
Post by newt5996 on Dec 10, 2017 2:04:25 GMT
If foreign viewers stop watching, the foreign channel won't buy the show from the BBC. The BBC won't make any money from overseas sales. Their 'boycott' isn't hollow My guess is BBC America isn't worried about boycotts. Orphan Black lasted five years, so they already have a viewership that's happy to watch a female-led Scifi show. And wasn't Orphan Black critically acclaimed? I never watched it because I can only watch so much.
|
|