Here's a Wacky Thought About TV...

Today, the AP, via CNN, tells me:

NEW YORK (AP) -- The fevered response to the latest loopy Paula Abdul episode, where she judged a phantom performance, just goes to show how "American Idol" continues to dominate television in its seventh season.

"American Idol" is now down to its final four contestants. The finale will be later in May.

Yet while "Idol" is still a hit, it's no longer necessarily hip.

You can hear it in the lack of enthusiasm in 14-year-old Katharine Bohrs' voice.
"Last year I was really into it, and the year before that," said the high school freshman from Brookline, Massachusetts. "This year in the beginning I was, but then track started up and I have a lot of homework. It's two hours long and I don't have the time."

She used to watch regularly with a friend. Now her friend records it and watches only occasionally, Bohrs said.

Statistics back up the anecdote. Audience declines for "American Idol" are steepest among youthful viewers, the people who set the pop culture agenda and are most likely to buy music made by the show's winners. These are not the people you want to turn off.

Make no mistake, "American Idol" is still the biggest thing on television. It is the reason why Fox will end the TV season later this month as the nation's most-watched network for the first time in history.

The show is averaging 28.7 million viewers this year, according to Nielsen Media Research.

That's down 7 percent from the nearly 31 million viewers who watched last year. It's also typical -- maybe better than typical: in this writers strike-marred season, "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" has shed 19 percent of its viewers, "Grey's Anatomy" is down 20 percent and "Survivor" is off 9 percent from last spring's edition.

"We're not in denial that the ratings are down," said Preston Beckman, Fox's chief scheduling executive. "There are things that we can control and there are things that we can't control. I defy anyone to show you a hit show that has been on for seven seasons that is at the level this one is on relative to where it started."

Among women aged 18 to 34, the "American Idol" audience has slipped 18 percent this year. Isolate teenagers 12-to-17, and the drop is 12 percent.

The median age of an "American Idol" viewer, once in the mid-30s, is now up to 42, Nielsen said. And -- horror of horrors -- viewership is actually up this season among people aged 50 and over. Those are the folks many television tastemakers pretend don't exist."

Well, well, well...

For years, we've been hearing about how TV has been losing viewers, especially the 18-40 year old prize consumers. It seems to me that in a knee jerk reaction to get those viewers back, TV decided it was going to be more like movies; sexier, edgier, darker, more mature.

We graduated from the family oriented 60s,70s and 80s to the darker Crime Shows, "Sopranoes", "Deadwood" and even family show "Battlestar Galactica" became edgy and angsty. TV, broadcast and cable, chose to keep a dead man's grasp on the younger audience who was being wooed away by Video Games, the Internet and all the other entertainment options that no one had 20 years ago.

For some reason, this just doesn't make sense to me and never has. If you are losing the younger viewers and retaining older viewers, why not make the ones you have happy - and loyal? Let's look at the demographics - These are my impressions and are generalities, I admit:

40-50 Year Olds: Born in the 60s, many have had computers since they came out. Many remember fondly 70s and 80s TV, they liked 80s music and they have seen tons of technology changes. Many had 8-tracks, most had Vinyl and Pong or at least knew about Pong. They waited in line at STAR WARS and had Commodore Computers. Many are on the internet and probably have Netflix or some other service.

50-60 Year Olds: Born in the 50's. Were in their teens during the hippy and Vietnam years. Likely remember fondly Westerns and other 60-early 70s fare. Had 8 Tracks and cars built in the 50's. They remember the cold war, nuclear proliferation and Flower Power. Probably have computers, may have gotten some help from the kids getting online but are online. May not got to the movies as much because the films aren't for them and probably rent DVDs instead. TV is OK but what the heck is up with 100 channels and nothing on?

60-70 Year Olds: Born in the 40's: There is nothing worth watching on TV. The media has changed so much and many of these people and the next generation older were raised with a much different set of sensibilities than later generations. TV is crude, loud and offensive and not something to watch with the family because there might be some nudity and no one wants to sit in a room with family and deal with that uncomfortable scene.

Anyway, rambling aside. When will the Broadcast and Cable folks understand that they need to embrace the older viewers. These are not people who grew up with horses and buggies and fought in the Big One. Now, as the population ages, these are people who smoked pot at Woodstock, played Pong, waited in line at Star Wars, burned their bras, opposed the Vietnam War, hid under their desks when the siren went off, etc. There's also more of them than ever before as the population ages and *gasp* some of them even buy things!

I recall a couple years back, there was a fun Western show with Tom Berenger that was part Gunsmoke and part CSI. It was dropped by its cable network because it appealed to the over 50 crowd. Now, look back above at who the over 50 crowd are... I bet these people are excellent consumers with some disposable income but for some reason, TV can't let go of the "Need to Attract the 18 year olds".

It's been a mainstream idea for years that teenagers put butts in the movie-plex. They take out dates, they have some money for entertainment, they tend to go back and see a movie multiple times, they can't drink and go to bars and are getting booted out of malls so they head to the movie-plex. Fair enough. But someone please tell me how that translates to TV?

Most of the people I know who watch TV, who really sit and watch TV, are all over 40. The younger people I know aren't the TV crowd. It seems so simple and yet, to quote ZOOLANDER, I "feel like I'm taking crazy pills". Most of those people watching TV have a show they like and then say, "Bah, there's nothing to watch" but they watch anyway because that's what they like and for some, that's what they are used to doing.

I want to helm a network that focuses on the over 40 crowd. I want to fill it with excellent scripted shows and maybe a little reality and prove that the TV audience has changed. I think the networks are too entrenched in archaic thinking to try something new! They'd rather chase the younger audience and then lament that all the numbers are down instead of sticking their necks out to change the paradigm.

There's the crux of the problem: "Sticking Their Neck Out Syndrome" in Hollywood. When people try new things and it doesn't take off in three episodes, the show is cut, people are fired, etc. It just ensures that the next executive who comes around won't stick their neck out. They'll cull ideas from books, older shows and films and from the success of other networks guaranteeing that if ABC has success with a show about "Psychics Who Use Their Powers to Thwart an Alien Invasion" that within a year, everyone will have a twist on it and will wonder why it doesn't do very well.

By the way, if you want that show ABC, drop me a line...

To put a long posting into some context. TV Execs, embrace your audience, don't try and make them something they aren't. If 40 somethings are watching your shows, be glad they are and find advertisers to match! Don't try and make them 18 again. Despite what the plastic surgeons say, that just isn't going to work...