After watching parts of the ...
Question: After watching parts of the WB's farewell Sunday night, I have to say that the WB's attitude over the years had definitely changed. I for one really liked the old WB with Michigan J. Frog. Wow, so many good shows at once. I remember how the WB was determined to get that target teen audience, and they did it in every way possible. The last few years, the WB really lost its way with the addition of all those older-skewing shows like
Blue Collar TV and
Related. These weren't necessarily bad shows, but they weren't a good fit for the WB. Do you think that if the WB hadn't steered away from the teen crowd, it would've remained profitable?
Answer: Hard to say, though the real hurdle to profitability for both the WB and for UPN (about which I received precious few letters of regret or farewell) was that both mini-networks were going after the exact same demo, in effect cannibalizing the audience. The problem for such a narrowly targeted network is that, even when the shows are generally good, they risk looking too much alike, and they’d get slammed for not having enough variety. It only makes sense for a network to attempt to broaden the audience in selected time periods, as the WB did most successfully with
Reba. But to blame shows like
Blue Collar TV and
Related for the WB’s collapse is to put too much importance on either of these shows. Besides, the network with the real identity crisis was UPN, which could never effectively shape its urban comedies, low-rated dramas, sci-fi (during the
Trek era), reality and wrestling into a coherent, cohesive image. I don’t exactly see the CW brand as much of an improvement on that front.
