TiVo Community Forums Archives - "Farscape's cancelling is the fault of the fans", says Sci-Fi president

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

"Farscape's cancelling is the fault of the fans", says Sci-Fi president
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: Skittles

TV Guide Online has posted an interview with Bonnie Hammer, president of the Sci-Fi Channel. The interview can be found at this link.

Rather than post the entire article, here's an inflammatory clip from the interview.
===================

TVGO: In that case, why not at least do a proper wrap-up, a TV movie or something?

Hammer: We looked at all the options. But with the speed in which it would have had to be done — because the set had to be broken down and the cast had to come back [from Australia, where shooting took place] and the scripts weren't written — [the cost] would have been enormous. [It would] have been almost as if we were doing [the upcoming epic miniseries] Children of Dune — and with less potential upside. We love the series... and would have liked nothing more than for it to have had a little bit more of a broad appeal. If all of those incredible fans who wrote in and sent notes and flowers and [whatnot] had actually watched it every week, we would have been able to do the 22.

===============

Although I've never watched the show, I find that comment very shortsighted. I certainly hope this woman gets innundated with more notes from already perturbed fans as a result of this.

Posted by: ClutchBrake

I did a big :rolleyes: when I read that this morning. I don't watch Farscape, but that was a pretty lame comment.

Posted by: MarkofT

Appearently both Sci-Fi and FOX are getting unrealiable Neilsen numbers. There was a quote a couple weeks ago in the Firefly thread that said much the same thing.

Posted by: brahamt

That interview was frelling bull dren. Now more than ever that proves the suits are idiots. Do you really think that people would send flowers and the like to SciFi if they did not watch the show.

You know, I get the fact that Stargate is broader based, and I get that it's about money, but if you can't expect to program to the lowest common denominator and get the best demographics. I'd put Farscape's demos vs any other shows any day of the week.

Sorry for the rant, but I can't stand stupid comments.

Posted by: Uther

What about all of us who did watch every week, but didn't write or send flowers?

Or do those of us with TiVo not count as viewers, because we are stealing from the networks?

Posted by: KLB

Well, I guess they have to save their money for more "mainstream" science-fiction offerings like "The Dream Team with Annabell and whoever-the-*ss-is-sitting-next-to-her".

yeah, that's it....

Posted by: stormsweeper

I like how Bonnie completely lies her ass off on the first question. They had a press release specifically mentioning 44 episodes total, not 35.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-...10/01/14.00.sfc

Posted by: innocentfreak

I still think the Neilsen Ratings are outdated much like the ratings for radio. In 26 years I have never spoken to anyone who is or has ever known someone to be a Neilsen family. I did see a picture once of what someone claimed was a Neilsen survey, but if that was the case, no wonder they are off.

Posted by: jones07

Neilsen families have a NDA. That states to never tell anyone their a Neilsen family.

Posted by: Bill Reeves

quote:
Originally posted by innocentfreak
I still think the Neilsen Ratings are outdated much like the ratings for radio. In 26 years I have never spoken to anyone who is or has ever known someone to be a Neilsen family. I did see a picture once of what someone claimed was a Neilsen survey, but if that was the case, no wonder they are off.

My family was a Nielsen family when I was a kid, in the days when VCRs were just coming out (so this would have been the early 1980s or maybe the late 1970s) -- I remember my parents being confused about how to report shows that we taped and watched later.

My assumption has always been that the Nielsens use families (i.e. households with children) for most of their data collection so they get a good cross section of shows -- e.g. the adults will watch prime time and news, the kids watch cartoons, etc., and it is cheaper for them to collect two sets of statistics from one household than to collect just one. Of course, this totally removes the college-age and young adult without children households, whose viewing habits are totally different than adults with children. So shows that "we" like get the shaft.

I'm probably wrong on how Nielsen does business, but that feeling of righteous indignation when my favorite shows get cancelled makes it worthwhile to hold on to these views.

Posted by: feldon23

I'm hopeful that Neilsen will take advantage of their partnership with TiVo and start using that data.

Posted by: trainman

quote:
Originally posted by innocentfreak
I still think the Neilsen Ratings are outdated much like the ratings for radio. In 26 years I have never spoken to anyone who is or has ever known someone to be a Neilsen family. I did see a picture once of what someone claimed was a Neilsen survey, but if that was the case, no wonder they are off.

I was sent, and filled out, a Nielsen diary for a week in the summer of 1999 that turned out to be the most boring week of television in the universe.

I did put in that survey that I watched that week's "Mystery Science Theater 3000" rerun on Sci-Fi, but they ended up canceling it anyway. I don't think any of us "MST3K" fans are too surprised by how Sci-Fi treated "Farscape."

Posted by: mstroh

When I was an undergrad in the early 90s I got to be a Neilsen Family of 1 for a week. They even paid me a dollar for my week's worth of work!

-mike

Posted by: Otto

I got a 1 week Neilsen booklet a couple years ago. Made a whole dollar! I did have a Tivo at the time, and simply I wrote everything I watched in the book. Easy.

Posted by: TimC

Neilsen ratings are vastly undersampled considering the population of the country and the number of programming choices available. Nielsen does two types of ratings: national and local. The national system uses their PeopleMeter electronic set top box to automatically record what is watched and upload the data every night. These are the ratings you see that the networks use for programming decisions. The local system uses the diaries some of you have received and that data goes to the local TV stations and cable systems.

So, for nearly 300 million people, each of which has a choice of about 100 different things to watch at any time, just how many PeopleMeters are out there for the national ratings? 5100 (!). People are not random. The smaller the "random sample" relative to the population, the less random the actual distribution of the sample can be. Their sample is not truely random anyway. They do randomly select households as their primary sample, but many of those decline to participate, so they end up with a subsample of their initial random sample of those people who want to do Nielsens. With 0.0017% of the population being sampled, it is very likely that different demographics are under represented, over represented, or completely missed. Lets say 10 million people actually watch Farscape. If Nielsen's microscopic "random sample" acurately captured those folks and all of them watched every time, then that would be 170 Nielsen people. But what if many of the demographic of Farscape watchers dont want to be hastled with a Nielsen box? With that small a sample, it would not be hard to only have 50 Farscape folks in their sample and have the show appear 1/3 as popular as it really is. After all, the difference between 170 and 50 when you are picking out of 300,000,000 is nothing. With 5100 PeopleMeters (with only a portion of those on at any given time) and 100 different show choices, the granularity at the bottom has to be terrible. Is a show with 50 Nielsen viewers really twice as popular as one with 25 Nielsen viewers?

Posted by: DaveLessnau

If Neilsen is only sampling 5100 people, then the show producers would be far better of getting actual data from TiVo. The only problem is that TiVo owners are self-selecting and probably tend more toward male technophiles than the general public (just a guess).

Posted by: KLB

This was posted on the message boards at www.savefarscape.com

as a response to the comments made by Bonnie Hammer:

====
SF.com response to Bonnie Hammer

Responding to Bonnie Hammer's comments here -
http://www.tvguide.com/newsgossip/insider/030107a.asp

This has been sent to TVGuide.com -

Savefarscape.com's response to Ms. Hammer's comments:

First off, we'd like to say that Savefarscape.com/Watchfarscape.com has never endorsed or proposed a boycott of the Sci-Fi Channel. On the contrary, we want people to watch the Sci-Fi Channel. While Farscape still has 11 remaining episodes we want as many people as possible to watch the channel and enjoy all the programs it offers. Every viewer of the Sci-Fi Channel is a potential Farscape fan. We wish only the best of health for the sci-fi genre on television and anybody who will promote and commit to quality genre programming.

On Sept 27, 2001, the Sci-Fi Channel sent out a press release announcing they had just inked a 44-episode commitment for a fourth and fifth season of Farscape. However, according to Farscape series star, Ben Browder, the deal was in doubt almost immediately, long before any episodes for season four had aired.

Financially, the cost for Farscape was not due to an increase between seasons four and five. Bonnie Hammer has cited the "increasing cost" of production, something the Henson Company flatly refutes, stating that the price of the individual episodes only increased because SCI FI was asking for additional airing rights. Interestingly enough, in the June 2002 issue of the Sci-Fi Channel's own magazine, Sci-Fi Channel Senior Vice President of Acquisitions, Scheduling and Programming, Tom Vitale, made the following statement regarding Farscape and the season four and five deal, "Sci-Fi has been able to continue ordering seasons of Farscape because the show performs strongly in the ratings. This is very satisfying to us at the network, as well as to Farscape's producers, since it clearly shows that the series has struck a cord with viewers. Happily, because enough viewers keep watching this terrific series, we can afford to keep making it."

"If all of those incredible fans who wrote in and sent notes and flowers and [whatnot] had actually watched it every week, we would have been able to do the 22." Well, ouch, how can we reply to that? We're really not sure, other than to say, if those people hadn't been watching Farscape, why did they take the time to write so many notes? Flowers to New York aren't cheap. It may be that the law of averages just doesn't fall on Farscape's side and of all those incredible fans, six of them are missing the Nielsen boxes the Sci-Fi Channel wants. Or it could be they all have TiVo, as Ms. Hammer pointed out on July 22, 2002, in an interview on adage.com, "I know TiVo is out there because I talk to people who've seen our shows, yet I know the numbers aren't showing up in the ratings."

According to Neilsen Media Research, Farscape's ratings (averaging a 1.3) are in the top 13% of all shows on ad supported cable, with only 1.3% of all shows getting above a 2.0. It should also be noted that since March 1999, the number of households receiving cable television has increased. The number of cable carriers offering the SCI FI Channel as a viewing option has also increased. In 2002, the SCI FI Channel was available in 3 million more homes than it was in the previous year. The growth of the effective potential audience size means that the number of estimated viewers required to reach a given ratings target has increased. Simply put, the number of viewers needed to produce a 1.3 ratings share in June 1999 is smaller than the number of viewers necessary to reach the same 1.3 ratings share in June 2002. Consistent ratings over that three-year period require a steady growth in actual viewer numbers. This is basic math.

Farscape's ratings information, according to our research, research from Joan at Farscapeweekly.com, and information published by the Sci-Fi Channel, is as follows -

The SCI FI Channel reports only the first airing’s rating on SCI FI Wire each Monday. When determining ad rates, however, the combined ratings for both airings are most likely used. Based on the combined rating for the 10 PM and midnight broadcasts, Farscape’s ratings in season four increased 16-17% over season three. (Note also that ratings are always lower in the summer months than they are in the winter. This is a fact of network life. Season 4 had no winter episodes, beginning in June. It is incorrect to compare ratings for episodes 3.01-3.11 to episodes 4.01-4.11.You must compare episodes airing 6/01-8/01 to episodes airing in 6/02-8/02 to obtain an accurate measurement.) And again, Farscape was available in more households this year, so while the actual number of viewers may grow a larger percentage would be needed to show a ratings increase.

Farscape’s core fan base is stable. Gaining additional rating points can only be achieved by reaching more casual viewers. One of the strongest influences on attracting casual viewers is advertising. This past summer, SCI FI’s advertising budget was heavily skewed towards pushing its newest acquisition, Stargate SG-1. By contrast, Farscape had no off-channel advertising, and greatly reduced in-channel advertising during the "Summer of SCI FI" 2002. Episodes with significant ad support, such as August 23rd's "Unrealized Reality," pulled in excellent ratings.

It must also be pointed out that prior to the start of season four, Farscape had been on a nine month hiatus, with no advertisement and no episodes/reruns airing at all between12/01 05/02. Casual viewers have cited the Sci-Fi Channel's extreme hiatuses as a large reason they've lost track of Farscape and may have stopped watching during later seasons.

In addition, Stargate SG-1 (a spinoff from the successful film which itself is aired frequently on many cable channels) was inherited by the SCI FI Channel after several seasons of airing on the premium cable channel Showtime and concurrently in local syndication on broadcast television, all factors amounting to additional unpaid advertising and promotion for new episodes of the series on SCI FI.

Another factor in any dip or "softening" of ratings was most certainly the change in Farscape's timeslot. The series was moved to the later 10pm slot, behind Stargate SG1, which took Farscape's original 9pm slot. Farscape Executive Producer, David Kemper, agrees that the move did hurt, putting Farscape into a more difficult slot, "We have direct competition for Odyssey 5 on Showtime." Jim Henson TV USA President, Juliet Blake, also noted that the late night slot cost Farscape some of its younger viewers.

Bonnie Hammer stated in December 2002, "There was a perception about the channel, that it was very geeky, that it was a rerun channel and that it as for boys, but we did an awful lot of research and found that there are so many women who are into science fiction. So what I had to do was educate the population to the fact that science fiction is much broader than you think." That statement was made three months after the cancellation of Farscape. The series' demographics are almost 50/50 women to men, an unusually high number of women for a science fiction program. Farscape’s Season 4 showed growth in the key demographics of Males 21-34 and 35-44, with exceptional growth in the older male demographic, ages 55-64, more than doubling its share of that age group in Season 3. Among females, there was even more significant growth, particularly in the key Female 21-34 demographic, which nearly doubled. Farscape’s share rating in the Males 21-34 group exceeds Stargate SG-1’s, and nearly matches Stargate SG-1’s rating in the Females 21-34 group. While Farscape does lose a significant portion of Stargate SG-1’s lead in for its 10 PM airing, the demographic skew of the two programs explain most of that loss: the majority of Stargate SG-1’s viewers are Males and Females in the 45-54 age group. Farscape’s audience is younger.

While all channels are in search of the golden "casual viewer", Sci-Fi Channel senior VP Tom Vitale pointed out on September 2nd, 2002 that the channel's goal was to develop a wide variety of sci-fi programming appealing to both devoted sci-fi fans and a more mainstream audience. "We're not going to get people with the special effects or the concepts. It's great characters and great storytelling." By a curious turn of events, the innovative and award-winning series, Farscape, was cancelled four days later. Farscape was the last of the original original series' on the Sci-Fi Channel, once upon a time the net was able to boast the title of the largest provider of original scripted series on cable. Sci-Fi inherited Stargate SG-1 from Showtime and their newest planned series, Tremors, has been delayed until later in 2003. Other new series planned seem to follow the current trends towards reality programming and telemovies, and away from scripted series.

__________________
SAVE FARSCAPE

Posted by: dcheesi

I'm guessing those PeopleMeters don't interact well with TiVos (ie. can't count shows tivo'd or taped when the viewer isn't there)? This, coupled with SciFi's ShutinLoserNight Prime scheduling, probably explains a lot.

Posted by: rich

We were a Neilsen TV family twice, and a Radio family once, over the last three decades.

Today on cnn.com they are reporting that the ratings for the premiere of 'Joe Millionaire' were FOX's best in eight years. This was just on the night before last. How do they compute these ratings so quickly? This isn't from people mailing in ratings books at the end of the week!

Posted by: tanstaafl

Something about Ms. Hammer's comments aren't sounding right to people outside of Farscape fandom either. There were some interesting quotes in a Washington Post article today:

quote:
Bonnie Hammer, president of the Sci Fi channel, was thrashed by the critics today when she attempted to sidestep a question about why the network was dumping the series "Farscape."

Like AMC topper Rob Sorcher the day before, perky Hammer pulled out the old "Gee I'd love to answer that one but we're here to listen to our on-air talent blather about their fabulousness, so I'm sorry I just can't possibly." The line is on the first page of the "How to Answer Those Tough Questions at the Press Tour" handbook that is required reading for cable execs.

The full article is at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...7-2003Jan7.html

(Down near the bottom)

Posted by: trainman

quote:
Originally posted by rich
Today on cnn.com they are reporting that the ratings for the premiere of 'Joe Millionaire' were FOX's best in eight years. This was just on the night before last. How do they compute these ratings so quickly? This isn't from people mailing in ratings books at the end of the week!

It's from the Nielsen Peoplemeter ratings, which they can get very quickly for the 30 or so largest markets, and then they extrapolate to get the national ratings. Nielsen compiles those ratings overnight every night, and so every morning, all the TV executives take a look at the "overnights."

Later, they can supplement those ratings with the books to get somewhat more accurate figures.

Posted by: Sinuralan

Back in the late 80s/early 90s, my family did the Nielsen logging for several months, maybe longer. We also had to scan the barcodes on all our foods and then hook the scanner up to an acoustic coupler to send the data to them. :)