Aaaaaah Doctor Who ratings!
Debacle! Free fall!
Hell and damnation! The show is screwed!
Not screwed! Ruined!
Shame on you, BBC! Shame on you!
Ah! Quite an habit to compare current ratings to
Voyage of the Damned or The Day of the Doctor,
or even to claim wrongly
that they are worse than season 26's,
last season before they cancelled the show in 1989.
So yes, if you compare the 5,29 millions viewers of The Doctor Falls
and the 12,8 millions of Day of the Doctor, it's easy to claim a decline.
But is it relevant?
Why not compare what can be compared?
Are the ratings as awful as we can hear sometimes?
First of all: what are the ratings?
They are used to know if a show is doing well.
It seems logical a program with good ratings is liked
and it brings visibility to the channel and ads.
That's why ads' prices are way higher
when channels broadcast an unifying program,
like the SuperBowl in the USA or Miss France here.
Therefore it's a major indicator for the channels.
It determines the most bankable programs.
Let me explain how the British ratings system works.
They register the habits of 5100 homes, each home representing 5000 other homes.
It gives them approximate ratings;
Let's start with some scores about Doctor Who,
to see if the fall of ratings OF DOOM actually happened.
Let's compare the NewWho series openings, series finales
and Christmas Specials (based on British ratings).
I'm going to use the J+7 ratings, which include the original broadcasts, TV reruns and BBC iPlayer VOD.
Two things from the series openings:
If we put aside Rose, which has a particular status as it get from the return of the show,
ratings between New Earth and The Pilot dropped of 2 millions, approximatively.
Spoiler, Tennant era is constantly a bit higher.
But let stick to this "2 millions".
Other phenomenon,
a rise for Deep Breath.
It seems logical when you compare to Rose and The Eleventh Hour.
New Doctor's introduction episodes make the best opening ratings.
Now, series finales, which aren't influenced by Doctor's departures,
except The Parting of the Ways,
which is at the same level as the lowest series finales.
Here we can clearly see the rise of Tennant's era, and then the drop.
Still around 2 millions, a bit more for The Doctor Falls.
It's even clearer with the Christmas Specials.
Drop of 2 millions viewers from the start to the end,
but almost the double between The Husbands of River Song, lowest Specials ratings,
and Voyage of the Damned, best NewWho ratings.
But still, globally, the drop between 2005 and 2017 is about 2 millions viewers.
Is it because of a lack of quality? Something else?
Spoiler: there are many reasons, and a lack of quality isn't one.
Well, not really, or more accurately, the term isn't right.
It's more an audience's lack of interest.
The audience who claims a lack of quality doesn't find what it likes in the current format of the show.
It's linked to various phenomena,
including a lack of communications around the show and a new targeted audience.
Tennant's era targeted "kids",
Smith's "older kids",
and Capaldi's "older but more solid fandom".
Less mainstream, more down-to-earth, less vigorous.
Potentially not as good for the audience
but great for a better visual quality
or at least more in correlation with the current fictional formats.
Let's be honest, even Tennant's fans add,
most of the time, when they recommend their favourite's era:
"It's a bit kitsch, but you have to hang on! You'll see, you'll finished addict, eventually!"
If the show stays that kitsch, without evolving with its time,
the audience would have dropped way before.
Let's repeat it again:
Doctor Who is based on change.
According to the news about series 11, the BBC sticks to this visual quality policy.
Doctor Who wants to play with the big boys.
Series 9 even tries to use a "to be continued" formula with its two parters.
A way to win the audience's loyalty and to build long term fans,
but which also can discourage the casual audience.
Doctor Who is still watched by many casual viewers, especially on Christmas,
and has to remain accessible for them.
We are constatly on a breach between "to be continued" and independant stories.
Moffat's era installed more continuity than RTS's,
but it probably had a part to play on the ratings from Series 5 to now.
We can't also deny a new turn in our consumption habits.
Young people watch less TV.
BBC IPlayer, yes, but also download, Netflix and other platforms.
But young people are Doctor Who's main target.
(Even if it's a family show)
According to the National Audit Office's report from December 6, 2017,
the average viewer spend 8:46 in front a BBC channel.
It drops to 3:28 for 16 to 34yo viewers.
Our generation watches differently.
We don't watch much TV, yet we watched much more cultural contents.
By the way, thanks for watching this video rather than ITV. Much appreciated.
Subscribe, hit the bell, bro!
So ratings can miss many people who will catch up the show later,
when they are free or when the entire show is binge-watchable.
They could download it or even wait for Netflix to put it on. No rush.
So this rating dropping isn't only about Doctor Who. It's global.
Indeed, it's more important on programs for the youth rather than on your grandparents games and soaps, but it's real.
For example, let's take Twice Upon A Time,
third worst Doctor Who Christmas Special J+7 ratings.
On the day, on December 25, 2017,
the show had a 5,7 millions ratings.
Whereas The Time of the Doctor, on December 25, 2013, did ratings of 7,6 millions.
Quite a dropping.
But besides the number itself, they were both the lead that night.
Twice Upon A Time's audience share was of 29% to 30% for The Time of the Doctor.
Suddenly, the gap doesn't feel so huge.
Let's compare to the BBC other programs.
Twice Upon A Time was the BBC's sixth best ratings that week.
To compare, The Doctor, The Widow and the Wardrobe, in 2012, was seventh
even if it attracted way more viewers.
Now let's compare to an other BBC's emblematic program,
which has regularly tremendous ratings: Eastenders,
best known in the French fandom to be part of the best crossover of the 20th century!
"What the hell am I doing here?"
The show exists since 1985 and still is one of the BBC's biggest program.
On the week of December 25, 1998, Eastenders was first with ratings of 22,14 millions.
On the week of December 25, 2007, Doctor Who did its best NewWho ratings with Voyage of the Damned, being second
after, Eastenders first spot with 14,38 millions viewers.
Do you feel the dropping starting due to the channels multiplication and new medias?
And finally, on the week of December 25, 2017, Eastenders Christmas Special is fifth,
just before Doctor Who,
doubled by other Christmas Specials and New Year's firework, best ratings with only 10,4 millions viewers.
Quite a fall.
One of Doctor Who's advantage over Eastenders is its international audience,
not easy to count but still important.
You know, people like us,
French, Germans, Koreans, Brazilians, even Americans and Canadians.
those fans around the world who don't miss an episode but who don't count in the official BBC ratings.
We matter: we help the show to keep its reputation and are potential goodies targets.
Theses goodies are now less numerous than before, but more original.
There are many books and collectibles.
The main target isn't kids anymore, so they are way fewer toys than before.
The merch seems so sadly empty compared to Tennant and Smith's eras.
It's probably due to communication decisions,
but it lacks of the hype surrounding the shops full of goodies of all types.
Still, we have access to numerous books, some of them quite neat. Nice objects.
And as the current figures are more collectibles than toys,
the BBC clearly targets collectors
and fans who have money to spend on more occasional and rare products
rather than kids, their main target for a long time.
So, if we put together all the elements we developed here,
should we be worried by Doctor Who ratings?
Of course, they fell apart, but so are the other programs'.
They actually stay quite high.
The show even helped to develop new poles at BBC Wales
which received new founds, according to the BBC's Annual Plan for 2017 and 2018,
to boost fictional creations in the Welsh department in order to and I quote:
« build on the success of Doctor Who, Casualty, Hinterland and Sherlock ».
So what? Is it still relevant to compare Doctor Who's current ratings with the old ones?
I personally think it involves to get rid of too many factors to be viable.
When we blame current Doctor Who not to have the same ratings as Tennant's era, so to obviously be not as good,
we put aside consuming habits changes,
new artistic views, new marketing strategy...
Globally, every changes over the last years.
It means we judge the quality of a program to the number of people who watch it.
Then let's apply this to the French 2017 Top 10 most watched programs.
(Basically just sport, politics and music shows)
I remind you France and UK have both quite the same population of 66 millions inhabitants.
First fantasy show is Joséphine Ange Gardien, 5,54 millions viewers,
another proof Mimi Mathy is really the French Doctor.
Good evening, everyone!
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét