ten41

http://www.tvguide.com/newsgossip/insider/

Farscape: Sci Fi's Murder by Numbers?
Tuesday, January 7, 2003

Farscape: Sci Fi's Murder by Numbers?


Since the Sci Fi Channel announced that the 11 new episodes of Farscape that begin airing Friday (at 8 pm/ET) will be the cult hit's last, the critics have spoken, the producers have spoken, and Lord knows, the fans have spoken. (Although Jim Henson Co. is developing a Farscape feature and anime project at starburst speed, and looking into syndication options, alienated viewers are nonetheless calling for a boycott of the cable network that shot down their favorite space opera.) In fact, just about the only entity that hasn't put in its two-cents' worth is Sci Fi... until now, that is. "We really tried to take the high road," says the cabler's president, Bonnie Hammer. "Instead of going out there and in any way belittling our partners, we kind of remained quiet." However, at last she is ready to break her silence and, in an exclusive interview with TV Guide Online, explain why the intergalactic castaways' star trek had to come to an end. — Ben Katner

TV Guide Online: So, what gives? Why would you want to cancel such a rad show?
Bonnie Hammer: We never wanted to cancel it. What we were trying to do was do 13 more episodes, not 22. The ratings had softened, and it was getting increasingly expensive to produce. We just couldn't make the financial deal. But we never wanted it to end when it ended. We had all intentions of doing 13 more episodes [beyond these 11] — we wanted to keep it in '03 and end it in '03. But financially, it was just too difficult to do.

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.

TVGO: You mean to tell me that Farscape doesn't have the numbers to merit a fourth season, but Stargate SG-1, which you just renewed, is attracting a big enough audience to deserve a seventh?
Hammer: Yes. Take a look at our numbers on Monday nights just for the Stargate repeats. It's crazy! Before we ended the season on Stargate, we were getting a very high 1 [rating] and peaked at, I think, a 2 or a 2.1. That was for new, original episodes. [Now] our average for Stargate repeats has been unbelievable — 1.7 and 1.8 [ratings]. When Farscape was repeating, we were lucky if we got a .8. So there's a huge difference.

TVGO: But Farscape is so cool. How can that be?!
Hammer: Even though Stargate is sci fi, it's very broad sci fi. It's not serialized. Every episode, you can come to it whether you've watched the one before [or not]. They are self-contained. My husband is kind of an absentee watcher, and he would tune in every fifth or sixth episode and have absolutely no issues [with following the plots]. Farscape, on the other hand, got very, very serialized. It got very "in."

TVGO: And that's a bad thing... ?
Hammer: They had brilliant and sophisticated writing, but it was so narrow that it basically was an invitation to not tune in if you weren't totally familiar with the show. It was brilliant when you got it, and some of the characterizations were truly amazing, but it took a little too much work.

cooper2000

I saw this earlier.
What she is saying, makes little or no sense.
They kept "The other show" because it's easier to digest. Hmm, I see.

das Monkey

I didn't imagine it possible, but I believe I hate this evil bitch-monster from Hell more than I did before I read this earlier.

Things I'd like her to address:

1) Which part of the "high road" was issuing an accusatory and insulting Press Release filled with lies back when the "announcement" (I use the term in quotes because they tried to hide the cancellation from us until DK told everyone) was made?

2) You claim the show would have been fine if those who are writing in about the show had watched it "every week." Then you claim that the only way to watch the show is "every week." Even my neighbor's three-legged dog can see the circular logic there.

3) Farscape's sagging ratings weren't due to the fact that, I dunno, you intentionally sabotaged it to break your 2-year contract? Yanking the final 4 episodes of a huge arcing season for over 8 months isn't the best way to maintain viewers. It doesn't take a degree in mathematics to know that the 13 episodes you "wanted" to do are not the same thing as the 22 episodes you contractually gave the producers and promised the fans through numerous press releases. All your financial ******** rings hollow since you completely renegged on promises made specifically to brand the network and bring in new viewers.

4) You are aware that Stargate's numbers started high because it brought together the old Showtime audience and the Farscape audience? Comparing repeats of a show that's brand new to the network to repeats of a show you've reran ad nauseum is absurd. The ratings for new episodes of Farscape were the highest on your network before you yanked those final episodes of season 3 in an attempt to sabotage the show so you could divert money to snagging Stargate from Showtime.

5) Is it possible ... just possible ... that you're issuing another misleading "press release" (I call it a press release, because this is the most superficial "interview" I've ever read) to keep us from boycotting your asstastic New Age channel?

6) Bite Me.

das

BoatDrinks

Don't sugar coat it, Das, give it to her straight!

Doug Heffernan

Cheer up Das, there is a new BUffy on tonight

fiver

I've been very angry at Bonnie Hammer since she cancelled Mystery Science Theater 3000. I pretty much boycotted anything from the sci-fi channel until I finally relented and decided to give Farscape a try very recently (largely due to the people on this board and a couple others I frequent). I think it's one of the best shows on tv period. My favorite shows list would look something like this:

Babylon 5
Farscape
Firefly
Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Angel

All genre shows oddly enough but very good television in general. I'm up to the end of the season 3 episodes in Farscape now so I'm almost ready to start watching the new ones starting on Friday. We so seldom get intelligent science fiction on television, I wish the studios could give us a hand in keeping the ones that actually work. Stargate can kiss my a** .

Michael

Jepthah

Not a Farscape fan, but I am in general sick and tired of network policies that kill good shows off because they are too impatient to build an audience. The 'instant gratification' culture is killing much good media; and as I understand it Farscape had enough of an audience and a loyal following to count for some substantial ad dollars.

elektra

das - That was funny. Not to mention the fact that when you hop a show around on nights and times, then all of a sudden the show disappears from the line-up with no explanation on where it is and when/if it will be back doesn't help either. Dorks.

WarriorPrincess

das, you said everything I wanted to say only better (and funnier) than I would have. There is apparently no end to my hatred of the misnomer network.

fiver, my favorite shows are the same as yours, after adding in Xena and changing the order a bit.

redskull47

And to make things even worse, last Friday SciFi began airing promos for the final 11 episodes of the 4th season, claiming they're a NEW season of Farscape-- as if these season 4 eps are really a FIFTh season. It was all I could do to keep myself from hurling the tv out the window.

Bonnie Hammer better hope and pray that I never see her cloven hooves crossing the street in front of my car....

Mordred

Wow... I always thought Bonnie Hammer was das Monkey's ex-wife.

I obviously don't pay enough attention to the sci-fi channel

Mordred

bboisvert

Apparently the answers to these questions were given during a press tour.


The Washington Post has some interesting commentary about it:

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

Cable suits beware: TV critics have had enough of your dodging questions here at Winter TV Press Tour 2003.

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.

Hammer's version went like this: "I'd be delighted to talk with you after this, rather than taking up time with the panel but . . ."

At which point, critics, who on Day 2 of the tour were already grumpy, let her have it.

"No!" they screamed at a visibly shaken Hammer.

"The bottom line was we couldn't come up with the financial deal that made sense," Hammer told them. She said that what critics might call evasiveness was really a decision by the network to "take the high road. We didn't go out to the press and tell them what was going on; we didn't feel that was appropriate, so we just very calmly just said . . . we just financially couldn't do 22 new [episodes]. We could do 13 and that's what we . . . tried very hard to do."

bboisvert

And here is www.savefarscape.com 's take on these answers by Hammer:

http://www.watchfarscape.com/news/ar...php?newsid=210

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, reasearch from Joan of 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.

das Monkey

• Quoth Mordred •<HR SIZE=1>Wow... I always thought Bonnie Hammer was das Monkey's ex-wife.<HR SIZE=1>

Now, that's funny.

das

elektra

Wait!!!! Hold on! They've cancelled Farscape, they didn't pick up Crusade or Legends of the Rangers, and they won't do another JMS show called Polaris - but they made a show out of that lame Firestarter movie and are making a show (Tremors) out of a movie I felt was too lame to even watch? Okay. So, it's not the scifi channel - it's the stoner channel. Got it.

Scot1458

I do agree with her that the show was less warm for new viewers.

I missed a few episodes and was totally lost. Stopped watching.

clemente

Hmmm.....the network cancels all its original programming in favor of repeats of network shows and there's a perception that its a re-run network. How stupid is Bonnie Hammer? Wait....I think its a stupidity that reaches previously uncharted depths that it is now refered to as Bonnie Hammer level stupidity.

elektra

I came in the show in the middle of first season. I've watched on and off because I thought it was good. I figured I catch up eventually. But it doesn't help when the airings are all over the friggin' place. I would have been a more regular watcher if the show had been on more regular times.

Rogue588

Ahhh that Bonnie. Man is she a pip. So, lemme get this straight...AND Well, Bon, I guess i'm NOT Sci-Fi since...

a) It was my girlfriend who was the one that introduced me to Farscape.

&

b) I didn't start watching until the middle of season two [My Three Crichtons to be precise]. I guess I should try and figure out how I got "in", but i'm tired since it took a little too much work to get "in".

Hopefully I won't have the same problem with the Dream Team With Annabelle & Michael or your broadcast of the sci-fi classic "Leprechaun" on the 26th...

WarriorPrincess

My best friend (another girl - more proof that many more women watch science fiction than are getting counted) got me into Farscape by telling me all about a mini story arc - I let her tell me spoilers because it was a show I didn't watch. Well, what she did tell me intrigued me so much that when they started airing every episode in order 4 to 5 days a week about a month later, I started watching - and kept on watching.

That's all it takes. It's not rocket science. Let the public know a show exists (I had no idea Farscape existed prior to her telling me about it) - that it is well written with great stories, and reward them for watching. How do you reward them? Show it at the SAME TIME every day or every week, depending on whether it's a rerun or a first run, and show EVERY SINGLE EPISODE IN ORDER. If the show is not in season, use the timeslot to reshow the previous season in order. The older seasons should have a regular timeslot of their own at least once per year (and cycle through all past seasons) so that new viewers can be snagged. People will watch, and they will come back for more. Just let them know it exists, why they should watch it, and make it easy to catch it. The show is good enough to hook viewers pretty fast, but it definitely needs to be aired properly for that to work. It's key, and so very simple.

Why are these elementary concepts so difficult for her to understand?!?

cooper2000

This was on Cinescape.com today...
More accessible? More fun?






Television News
SCI FI eyes "broader" approach
Aims to keep audience in wake of TAKEN

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dateline: Thursday, January 9, 2003

By: MIKE WHYBARK
By: News Editor
Source: The Hollywood Reporter

THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER observes that the Sci Fi Channel has taken moves of late to preserve the substantial audience growth stemming in part from the success of TAKEN last month.

Bonnie Hammer, president of the Sci Fi Channel, says, "We want to become more human, more accessible, more fun and just a bit broader, but not as broad as a general entertainment network."

das Monkey

• Quoth cooper2000 •<HR SIZE=1>Bonnie Hammer, president of the Sci Fi Channel, says, "We want to become more human, more accessible, more fun and just a bit broader, but not as broad as a general entertainment network." <HR SIZE=1>

So, you mean, you want to be exactly like USA? Strange ... seems to me I heard someone say that over a year ago ... just change the name already and be done with it, you evil whore monster.

das

ten41

Question: I just read the Jan. 7 TV Guide Online interview with Sci Fi Channel president Bonnie Hammer about the cancellation of Farscape. I am copying the exact things she said: "Even though Stargate is sci fi, it's very broad sci fi. It's not serialized. Every episode, you can come to it whether you've watched the one before [or not]. They are self-contained.... Farscape, on the other hand, got very, very serialized. It got very 'in.' ... They had brilliant and sophisticated writing, but it was so narrow that it basically was an invitation to not tune in if you weren't totally familiar with the show. It was brilliant when you got it, and some of the characterizations were truly amazing, but it took a little too much work." So my question or comment is, Farscape is too serialized, yet Sci Fi just went out and purchased The X-Files and is now running reruns of this, one of TV's most serialized "in" shows around. They also showed Babylon 5, another very serialized show. Do you think they are covering up to try to make it the show's fault and the fans' fault? They seem to have given carte blanche on the direction of the show and never said they would like to see more stand-alone episodes. Does this make sense? — Theresa M.

Matt: There's no good way to justify this cancellation, and in this interview, Hammer came perilously close to admitting what I believe to be the truth: Sci Fi believed Farscape was too smart for what it considers its core audience to be, whatever that is. This is yet another indication that any show that requires attention, demands loyalty and rewards intelligence is an increasingly endangered species, even on so-called niche networks that are supposed to be encouraging such things.

http://www.tvguide.com/tv/roush/mattask/

das Monkey

das

cooper2000

I read that too this morning.
Still no word on ratings. Anyone?

Wheres your review of Kansas das?