MovieChat Forums > 30 Rock (2006) Discussion > Did comedies like 30 Rock and Parks + Re...

Did comedies like 30 Rock and Parks + Rec hurt NBC in the long term?

posted 11 years ago by Jedi360
51 replies | jump to latest

Before anyone attacks me, let me be clear that I'm not bashing the shows that I'm about to list and I am a big fan of these shows.

30 Rock, Parks & Rec, and Community have been one of the most critically acclaimed sitcoms to ever be on TV but, from a business (ratings) standpoint, all three of those shows have been enormous failures for NBC and should have been cancelled years ago. Even if you include DVR ratings, the ratings for those shows are still horribly low and were a drain in NBC's Thursday night lineup because it only catered to a specific kind of audience. In other words, NBC kept shows on the air longer than they should have just because of critical acclaim.

I know some of you may read that last sentence and assume that I'm just trolling but let me explain my position. Those three shows might have the love from critics and a small group of fans but NBC made a mistake in keeping those shows on the air instead of trying to find shows that connect with the overall viewing audience.

Lets start with 30 Rock.

A great show with great writing and a great cast but was never a hit in the ratings. Even Tina Fey herself has said that the show only lasted as long as it did because it was an awards contender. This is where NBC made a mistake. From business point of view, 30 Rock should've been cancelled after its second season when it was clear it was never going to be a true hit for NBC. While Tina Fey's star power increased dramatically after her Sarah Palin skits on SNL in 2008, her star power did nothing to help her own show. If anything, the ratings got worse after that. To keep a show on the air just because it gets awards and to keep a certain star on their network is a bad business strategy in my opinion. Even now that 30 Rock is over, its ratings in syndication are so-so at best.

The Office in its prime only ever got semi-average ratings between 7-9 million viewers.

As for Parks & Rec and Community?

In my opinion, those two shows were the best comedies that NBC had in the last four years but, like 30 Rock, horrible in the ratings department. NBC can't keep renewing shows just because they want to keep a very small fans base happy.

Now I don't like The Big Bang Theory and I despise Two and a Half Men (awful show) but I will give CBS credit for one thing: They don't really give a damn about critical acclaim when it comes to their comedies. If its a hit in the ratings then that's all that matters because, despite what you may read on the internet, ratings still matter even in the age of DVR and Netflix.

With 30 Rock ended, Parks & Rec and Community likely to end this season, this leaves NBC with a huge hole in there Thursday Night Lineup. NBC now has to replace their critically acclaimed but low rated shows with other shows that will hopefully will be hits. Right now, NBC is failing at that because none of their new comedies so far have been hits and one of them has already been cancelled. Unless a miracle happens, NBC's Thursday Night Lineup will likely suffer for many years.

People need to remember that, at the end of the day, TV is a business and a business needs to make money.

I apologize for the long post but I needed to vent.

Don't be jealous because I'm me.

[–] jname96 11 years ago

Don't worry, even us ardent fans of those shows can agree that they aren't "popular", lol.

Well, I remember in 2004, ABC was the bastard child of the big networks. SNL even made a joke about it on Weekend Update: "ABC is creating a show with Raven Symone in it. So just remember: CBS has "Survivor", NBC has "The Apprentice," and ABC has that cute little girl from 'The Cosby Show'."

Then.. literally that same season: "Desperate Housewives" came out of left field and became a pop culture phenom, lifting ABC (above NBC eventually).

My point? It can be a volatile business, for BETTER as well as worse.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Zanon45 11 years ago

I have to sadly agree with what the OP said. I will always love Parks and Recreations, Community, and 30 Rock of course. I'm happy that I got 7 great years of great comedy in 30 Rock but I do agree that 30 Rock only lasted as long as it did because it won awards and NBC's loyalty to Tina Fey and Lorne Michaels which is why its one of the reasons NBC is in a bad state right now.

As much as I hate to say it, from ratings perspective, 30 Rock should've been cancelled after its 3rd season. Even though 30 Rock's ratings were never high or even average, The 3rd season was really when the ratings started to go down the gutter.

Again, I will always be a huge fan of 30 Rock and I'm glad I didn't miss out on one of the greatest sitcoms ever made but that show should be happy it was on NBC because it would have never lasted past its 1st season on any other network.

[–] fleurfairy 11 years ago

NBC does not know how to market and advertise their shows. Their ads and previews for all shows are terrible and have been for many years. They usually pick the cheesiest line or stupidest joke from an episode, slap it on a commercial loaded with CGI graphics and call it a day. They need a complete marketing overhaul.

[–] wheelr 11 years ago

Sadly, everyone has a point, I do get the feeling that with the ratings that these shows get/got, if they had been on any other network, they would have been cancelled a while back. I think The Office had better ratings than 30 Rock/Parks and Rec. 30 Rock had a lot of love from the critics and did fantastically well at all the main awards shows and I think that's a huge part of what kept it on the air. Parks and Rec is the one that confuses me slightly with regards to it being renewed every year, it's ratings are just as crappy as 30 Rocks ever were and although it does get some nominations, it hasn't walked away with ANY wins from any of the main awards shows, this is the show that screams misplaced loyalty to me.

=================================================================================
Just because YOU don't like something doesn't mean it is empirically not good.-Tina Fey

[–] wab-3 11 years ago

You've got half the argument right in stressing the effect of streamed and stored content delivery (DVR, instant download services, etc.) as a conventional ratings killer. But you're underestimating the high marginal income demographics that very intelligently written shows like 30 Rock can draw. We're only a few years away from the time that shifts in the marketing models for content like sitcoms will be much more finely tuned, and that providers will have new revenue harvesting systems in place to leverage exposure to really choice demographic niches.

Or, to put it more simply, viewers who want shows like 30 Rock also buy Cayennes and shop at Whole Foods. Content providers just need to figure out how to leverage upon that.

But you also have to consider that both shows had organic technical problems of production that pretty much doomed them to die when they did. I do feel badly for Amy Poehler that Parks is dying an early death.

[–] Jedi360 11 years ago

Parks & Recreations is one of the BIG examples of my argument in my original post. Its a damn shame that more are not watching Parks & Rec because its a great show but, like wheelr mentioned, NBC has only kept Parks & Rec on the air because of Amy Poehler's rising star power.

Its weird because, like I said in my original post, Tina Fey became a major star after 2008 but that did nothing to help the ratings for 30 Rock. The same thing is happening with Amy Poehler in which her star power has been slowly rising for the last few years but Parks & Rec has not benefitted from that. People may be big fans of certain actors but that doesn't mean they will watch whatever TV or movie project they do because if they did then 30 Rock and Parks & Rec would have been huge ratings juggernauts.

I'm not saying that I want Parks & Rec to get cancelled because I love that show but sadly Parks & Rec was and never will be a hit in the ratings (like 30 Rock). Also, if NBC wants to turn its fortunes around then they can't keep supporting low rated shows no matter how much critical acclaim it gets and/or how much of a cult following it receives especially if they have almost NO HIT SCRIPTED SHOWS on their network.

Don't be jealous because I'm me.

[–] jname96 11 years ago

To be fair, Fey and Poehler are not necessarily "mainstream" stars. They are stars that are propelled primarily by a an insistent but definite demographic: mostly hip, youngerish, urban, comedy-savvy and yes, I'll just say it: Leftwingers.

For lack of a better example, I went to a writing group recently, and the topics of our favorite TV shows came up. This group of near-middle-aged, average people (meaning: not particularly hip or schooled in comedy), totally derided me for liking both 30 Rock and Parks and Rec.

It was like I was a friggin' Alien who gave birth to Satan. Seriously. Now, at my workplace where I'm surrounded by young, creative and funny people--they ALL watch these shows.

I think most "average" Americans aren't really into Fey or Poehler.

[–] likerash 11 years ago

What sorta shows could those middle-aged average folk be in a writing group for and find better than 30 Rock? 30 Rock is a big writers show. I guess comedy is as subjective as they say. Oh and Tina Fey really detracts the right, even her parents (big right wingers) can't approve, aha.

I don't think the cultural penetration of Parks & Rec can be measured by ratings really, I think this could be one of those shows with beg Netflix/Hulu impact, I certainly got involved with it through Netflix and know of many people in the same position.

I am very happy NBC stuck with these shows and let them prevail creatively even because of the affiliation with SNL alumni and Lorne Michaels. I think NBC's witty sitcom golden age is truly over with the end of Parks and Community.

[–] jname96 11 years ago

What sorta shows could those middle-aged average folk be in a writing group for and find better than 30 Rock? 30 Rock is a big writers show.

-I KNOW, right? You got me. Pretty disheartening. But I just struck out, with this "writer"'s group.. Needless to say--it was my first and only meeting w/ these guys. I don't wanna sound elitist, but they obviously weren't savvy. It was an amateur writer's group, so it's not like they were accomplished, anyway.

Let me put it this way: They were talking about the TV show, "The Ghost Whisperer", at the meeting.... enough said?

[–] egujwrrxftoxm 10 years ago

I have come to the realization that I'm living in a young, liberal, trendy bubble. I scroll through my channels and I'm like who's really watching Swamp Loggers? Who's watching TLC but not as a joke? Millions of people are. Thank you NBC for not cancelling 30 Rock because it doesn't get as many viewers as the Bachelor..

------------------------------

I respect people based on how they respect others.

[–] Stubby-9 11 years ago

But you also have to consider that both shows had organic technical problems of production that pretty much doomed them to die when they did.

No, we DON'T have to consider it, because "technical problems" had nothing to do with the show's termination.

======================
Much better than the other 8 Stubby's

[–] wab-3 10 years ago

Oh yes, of course they did. If Baldwin had been willing to stay on for another couple of seasons--which, in hindsight, he should have done--Tina would have had to seriously rebuild the 30 Rock writing staff, which had gone woefully downhill in Seasons 5 and 6. It was Baldwin's fault that 30 Rock had to wrap, but Tina's management of the show was faltering as well.

[–] Long_Ball_Larry 11 years ago

^^wab's got it - the NBC demographic is higher earning professionals. Seinfeld made that point on Howard Stern last summer. I treavelled around the midwest last summer and everyone was a CBS viewer. Nothing against the midwest, but they don't make as much money as northeasterners, particularly the NYC/Northern NJ/ southeastern Conn. and parts of lower upstate NY. In the '90s I was stationed in NC, and my fellow Marines were from all over the country, but every Thursday it was myself and another New Jerseyan, an RI guy, and a guy from Brooklyn that got together and watched Seinfeld and even brought the videos on ship with us. I'd go to our rec room, and everyone else would be watching NASCAR or wrestling.

The higher earning demographic is important to advertisers and it shows in the ad sales. As for award shows, they bring in a tremendous amount of ad sales and simultaneously get the nominated shows and hosts a lot of attentiion. So a network can use that strategy much in the way artsy films that are up for Oscars are re-released when award season rolls around.

My couch pulls out but I don't

[–] wab-3 11 years ago

Wow, that's very interesting that Easterners, even Marines afloat, would have been watching Seinfeld. Doesn't exactly jibe with the Devil Dog image. Not that I'm prejudiced; one of my best buds did ten years in the Corps.

And you're exactly right about CBS being the network of choice for the great, but not so wealthy, heartland.

[–] Long_Ball_Larry 11 years ago

like I said, wab, these were Marines originally from NJ/NYC/Boston...I do remember a few others getting hooked on it, but it was after seeing us watching and laughing so much

the CBS demo is also different w/ age groups; NBC has been winning the 18-49 this entire fall, but CBS still has the most total viewers

My couch pulls out but I don't

[–] danielcw 11 years ago

30 Rock, Parks & Rec, and Community have been one of the most critically acclaimed sitcoms to ever be on TV but, from a business (ratings) standpoint, all three of those shows have been enormous failures for NBC

As somebody else said in the thread, you are looking at the wrong numbers :)
30 Rock and Parks & Rec have already been covered in the thread,
and rumor has it that the current seasons of Community are cheap for NBC, maybe even free.
I don't know how much money a show has to make, to just coffer the cost of broadcasting, but I am pretty sure they wouldn't renew the shows, if they wouldn't make a profit.

Also, the numbers from all 3 shows were never so bad, that a renewal couldn't be jsutified froman outsider perspective.

[–] wab-3 11 years ago

You're forgetting about the opportunity cost of the timeslots. NBC isn't in the business of airing sitcoms that are barely profitable. That's probably what's killing Parks & Rec, that it's in a prime Thursday timeslot and they want to take a chance on a new show that will get higher ratings. They could try to move it to a new timeslot but conventional wisdom is that you're going to lose viewers when you move a show and that would drive it down to the point of unprofitability. So it makes better business sense to just cancel it.

[–] danielcw 11 years ago

You're forgetting about the opportunity cost of the timeslots.

Yes I do, because I have no idea how to judge it, nor any data to form an idea.

NBC isn't in the business of airing sitcoms that are barely profitable.

Yes, but that's a side effect.
NBC's primary goal is growth, financial.
So they cancel shows that are below their average, and keep the shows, that are above their average.
How many shows they can cancel also depends on how many good pilots they have, because NBC can't, of course, air nothing.

That's probably what's killing Parks & Rec, that it's in a prime Thursday timeslot and they want to take a chance on a new show that will get higher ratings.

Which new show?

They could try to move it to a new timeslot but conventional wisdom is that you're going to lose viewers when you move a show and that would drive it down to the point of unprofitability.

Shows get moved around all the time, mostly close to hiatuses.

A weak show, can thrive on a less demanding timeslot, that would otherwise be "empty"

So it makes better business sense to just cancel it.

Only if they have something more profitable to replace it with.

[–] Long_Ball_Larry 11 years ago

Shows get moved around all the time, mostly close to hiatuses

that's true, but the networks almost always regret it - those moves kill ratings

the key is just to find a couple of great shows to build around; Frazier, ER, and Friends must've loved the fact that Seinfeld was bringing in 22M viewers a week - I mean, that's MNF (or now Sunday) types of numbers

My couch pulls out but I don't

[–] likerash 11 years ago

Interesting, I didn't know that's how Seinfeld survived earlier on..
The AV Club posted this http://www.avclub.com/article/rich-people-like-emmodern-familyem-poor- people-lik-105633 interesting article last week about the shows being watched by the richest people and shows watched by the poorest people. Modern Family and Parks & Recreation skewed the highest median income households, so Parks is surviving in similar form to 30 Rock and Seinfeld. Now, if I think about it 'Sean Saves the World' could be what ultimately kills the National Broadcasting Company.

[–] wab-3 11 years ago

...So Parks is surviving in similar form to 30 Rock and Seinfeld.

Well, "survived" is the correct tense to use. It's already dead; NBC just hasn't announced yet that they won't be airing any more episodes of Parks. It won't be coming back in the spring.

The pattern is hardly a surprise. NBC has been chasing that high disposable income demographic since the Cheers days. That's why Frasier was such a huge cash cow for NBC: it had massive numbers in the high income demo. Unfortunately, they seem to have lost their touch for finding those kind of sitcom hits. I can't believe they didn't bid on Brooklyn Nine-Nine, given that Samberg and Schur are both ex-SNL guys.

Parks, unfortunately, was crippled by miscasting from the start and that prevented the show from building a good fan base it's first couple of seasons. The writing was also very uneven and ill-formed its first season. It was so off that it drove me away, and I'm a huge Amy Poehler fan. So good demo. pull or no, the show always had one foot in a bucket technically, and once they consummated the Leslie/Ben relationship they really didn't have anywhere to go in terms of narrative.

[–] me-nyc 11 years ago

You were dead wrong.

[–] Long_Ball_Larry 11 years ago

I don't think anything is going to "kill" NBC, but I agree that SSTW is awful.

Comcast, Universal Pictures, Universal Theme Parks, USA, and Bravo are all extremely successful, so I think they'll be okay. I'm just glad that reality/competition shows are no longer our only options when we wanna watch TV. I remember being extremely annoyed when The Black Donnellys was pitted against American Idol and ultimately cancelled.

My couch pulls out but I don't

[–] Zanon45 11 years ago

NBC has a real dilemma on its hands. If they do cancel Parks & Rec, they better do an all out media campaign (somewhat what they did with Smash when it premiered) to promote whatever replaces it because, in terms of TV ratings, NBC has nothing in the comedy department. It would cost millions but what do they got to lose? Right now (with the exception of Modern Family), the Thursday night comedy line up on CBS is getting all the media attention and the ratings (for the most part) right now.

[–] wab-3 11 years ago

I doubt the peacock suits see it that way. With Leslie recalled from office and Rashida and Rob's characters exiting--and Andy more or less MIA this season--the show has nowhere to go in terms of story. The two opening London episodes were a nice change but the rest of the season has just been filler to pad out the run until the axe finally falls. The only reason to watch it now is to see if they come up with something funny for Ron Swanson.

Again, you have to look at the marketing aspect in relative terms. Parks is so dead in terms of marginal audience draw that any new show that replaces it will get higher ratings just because it's new. NBC doesn't really need to promote the replacement show, or at least not much. They'll do their typical midseason blanket promo push to promote all the replacement shows and shows in new time slots, but they don't need to make a particularly heavy push for Parks' replacement.

NBC is desperate, so they've essentially written off this season in terms of sitcoms. It would just be throwing good money after bad to try to do heavy promo for whatever they've got slated for the spring.

[–] Zanon45 11 years ago

NBC is desperate, so they've essentially written off this season in terms of sitcoms. It would just be throwing good money after bad to try to do heavy promo for whatever they've got slated for the spring.

The problem is that NBC doesn't seem to have a choice any longer. If NBC doesn't spend money heavy promotion on whatever replaces Parks & Rec then those new shows are doomed to fail whether they're critically acclaimed or not.

[–] wab-3 11 years ago

Again, you're not quite getting how network show development and promotion works. Anything they put on to replace Parks can't do worse in the ratings than Parks was, so whatever it is it can't really fail. Thus they don't actually need to promote Parks' replacement show.

Viewers (those that still watch primetime network fare by rote...meaning geriatrics in old folks homes) tend to get locked in on their shows in the fall. Midseason replacement shows are always a crap shoot, even on networks with a strong slate of shows, like CBS. If you're NBC, with your slate of sitcoms a smoking ruin, trying to push a replacement show into being a hit via heavy promo would be like betting on 0 in roulette. Too many viewers have already written off all of NBC's shows for this season. Better to wait until the fall to reboot.

[–] me-nyc 11 years ago

Again, you're not quite "getting" how any of it works, since P+R came back and is now renewed for another season. Your condescending comments are pretty unattractive especially when they fall so off the mark and all of your predictions are so very incorrect.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]