EW: The CW’s Identity Crisis
EW gets it right…this time.
I’ll be the first to admit, I’ve got a bit of a vendetta against Entertainment Weekly right now. A publication I once adored has turned into nothing but a TV gossip rag and when they say things about Supernatural that is wrong (which is often), I get pretty fired up.
However, Ken Tucker is a really decent (and level headed) commentator, and he has a point here about The CW and it’s less than stellar treatment of its “higher ratings than other shows but not promoted” genre programs. So, do you agree? I do.
http://watching-tv.ew.com/2010/02/26/cw-smallville-supernatural-smallville-gossip-girl-90210/
Supernatural has, as far as I have been aware, always been poorly promoted. Isn’t it getting better, really?
The promo in the UK was marvellous lately (but that was paid by the network airing Supernatural there, LIVING), and since the show is coming back to German screens, there have been some cool tv-ads and the leading magazine over here that deals entirely with TV-shows, ‘TV-Highlights’ put a high-gloss four page report in their latest mag.
The CW has treated this show, promotion-wise, like a stepchild – is it not improving now that the ratings are better and they received the People’s Choice Award?
‘the network can assert that it gets more ad dollars by dangling youth and beauty. That Leighton Meester makes more of an impact in the media than Jensen Ackles.’
The only times I’ve seen Leighton Meester in any magazine was when fashion or make up was commented. I have never heard anything about her acting abilities (and what I’ve seen of her so far does not exactly interest me in that department). If a sense of fashion (or lack of) is the only thing an actor owns to be new-worthy, well, thank you very much.
I’m not sad about the fact that Jensen Ackles or Jared Padalecki et al don’t appear that often in magazines. They don’t seem to seek out the spotlight too much, and hopefully they’ll be able to live outside of it for a while longer. Should they so desire, of course.
As many female fans watch the show, promoting it with the handsome faces of our leads would not be wrong, would it?
With a sixth season already announced, a new promotional strategy might be just what the doctor ordered. I agree with Ken Tucker that Supernatural is more fun to watch than those teenage-school-whatever shows.
Well, we’ll undoubtedly see how the CW will handle the matter within this year.
Thanks for pointing this out to us, Alice. Best, Jas
I suppose I can understand such a business model, and though I have very little faith in my fellow citizens on anything, sometimes they do have taste, so it’s okay now and then to promote things with substance over things that are mere sugary shallows.
I know that for every Zeppelin, there are a million other bands who sell but are crap, but CW is screwing up. And as Jas said, especially given CW’s core audience of females, why not bust out a series of ads with Jared and Jensen? Like that wouldn’t go over? C’mon.
The CW seem to living in a bubble.When Supernatural ends (:cry::-) what will they do then when fans of the show desert the network completely? If they do not show just a little innovation in advertising the hit show they *have* then why would Supernatural fans stick with the network at all?
I’m just happy that Living are promoting Supernatural so much more than the channel it was on before 😀
Here’s where I am different than a lot of viewers. Perhaps it’s because I’m Canadian and with so much programming that is imported to our TV screens my idea of “Network” is a little skewed.
However, I don’t care who the network is. I watch a show that interests me. When Supernatural ends, I’ll look for the next program that catches my attention, regardless of what network it’s on.
Now, if I knew that the CW had a reputation for signing up really great Sci-fi/Fantasty/Horror shows, then that would be something. Certainly a reason to stick with a network, BUT, I currently don’t know ANY network that caters to my tastes. Sure, we have Space Channel and the US has Sci-Fi but I find that Space Channel doesn’t run any real original programming. When they were owned by CTV, we got the benefit of additional airings of programs (CTV mid week and Space on the weekends) but they weren’t going out of their way to take shows like Supernatural and launch them.
So really, what chance does the CW have of retaining viewers regardless of whether or not they adequately (in our opinion anyhow – grin) promote Supernatural, Smallville, etc? I would have thought it would be a case of promoting a show where you could generate advertising dollars because you could get people to watch. Nothing more.
Course, what do I know. It seems that logic doesn’t live at the networks anymore. 🙂
I’m with Tigershire, I don’t have any channel loyalty at all, fickle minx that I am, I just follow shows I enjoy round the schedules and if they switch channels so do I. I don’t know anyone who just sticks to the same ones apart from my Mum, and that’s just ‘cos she’s lost the remote … CW seem to make a career out of flogging dead horses so it’s probably a bit optimistic to expect them to change their ways now …
I agree, Alice. SPN and SV are levels above GG, OTH and 90212 for me. But while all these shows are aimed at young females, SPN and SV are sci-fi/fantasy and that just doesn’t appeal to everyone.
I also agree with Suze and Tigershire, I have no loyalty to CW. CW has done nothing to promote the series, and everything to promote VD. That show, thanks to CW, made the cover of TV guide not too long ago. THAT’S the kind of support SPN needs!
In Croatia Supernatural aired on a state-owned network, Saturdays at 1p.m., had absolutely no trailers nor promos, no advertisings in printed media, no nothing. I came across it accidentally while zapping thru the program when I couldn’t sleep. None of my friends wanted to watch it because of the late hour, and even I missed episodes. Now I have the dvd-box, but none of my friends want to watch it because there’s no Croatian translation. After 2 seasons the network stopped airing it.
I am loyal only to one network, and that is arte. Whenever I moved to a new home or got a new tv I made sure arte was available. But I’m aware that loyalty to a tv network seems kinda ridiculous, doesn’t it? I mean, each network has it’s good and bad moments, so why be loyal to any? Watch whatever interests you, no matter where it’s airing, right?
What I want to say is, that obviously today nothing can be sold/shown without promotion. A thing can be perfectly beautiful, useful, healthy, whatnot – if there’s no proper advertising to get people interested in looking into it, there’s no use of its perfection. And then people can decide whether they’ll take it or not. And the packaging (here: the network) should not be of any importance.
I like to watch pilots of new shows, see what it’s all about and then decide whether I’m gonna keep watching or not. For that promos on tv are helpful. Just like billboards. And magazine covers. Any kind of anouncement of a show. Many shows here are heavily promoted, but I don’t watch many, actually just two occasionally. Supernatural had none promotion and an absurd airtime, but after 4 years I’m still here eagerly awaiting the upload on the net. I don’t think that I’m especially fit to be a tv-show-critic, I watch far too little tv to be one, but when a show nails me – ME – to the tv screen for 4 years now, then it HAS to be GOOD. And people who work on tv should know better than me, shouldn’t they?
Ok so I have no idea about America (it confuses me like humans confuse Castiel heehee), but here in England since Living picked up the series Supernatural has gone from having one not-very-good advert every once in a blue moon to having lots of really good promos, they ran lots of well put together adverts in the run up and had a online competion and at the end of ep5 ran I really cool montage of upcoming clips. Was all a lot better than most American shows get over here and the airing times pretty decent, 9pm on a Wednesday I think.