Written By: Gabrielle Smedes
Mainstream television continues to be one of the largest driving forces of our culture today. What we watch affects decisions about what we wear, what we eat, where we go. Even further, television can control the way we spend our time: how often have we cut plans short so we can be home for our favorite shows? Television networks recognize this dependent relationship, and as a result are choosing to take fewer and fewer risks.
One example is the spin-off: a show developed with characters already proven popular from an earlier show, placed in new situations, yet capitalizing on audience familiarity and loyalty. Spin-offs have been around since the 1960s—The Andy Griffith Show is one of the earliest and most successful examples—however, as television programming shifts to favor reality rather than traditional, studio-produced shows, the concept of the spin-off is going in an entirely new direction.
Spin-offs can now extend to the brand, not necessarily the characters. Instead of placing beloved actors or personalities in new situations or settings that could prove risky—not to mention expensive to produce—spin-offs are now are just as likely to do the reverse: simply recycle an idea that has already been successful, but cast new personalities who have less history with the public, but who also are seen as having fewer costs of demands.This approach reduces the risk inherent in developing any new brand or product, and also ensures greater profitability. One of the most successful examples is the Bachelor franchise, which each season places a new crop of single men and women vying for love, each season maneuvers them more or less through the same set of challenges, and each season remains a ratings hit.
But it’s not just high ratings that are a sign of a show’s success. Networks are increasingly relying on social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter to gain information about what resonates with viewers. What people are saying online about certain shows, or characters, helps executives determine what viewers actually like, not just simply what they watch. This approach allows producers to determine when a personality is popular enough to warrant their own spin-off, in the “old-fashioned” sense. MTV’s Laguna Beach is an example, whereby certain members of the cast had such high public approval ratings that the network determined they were worth the “risk” to follow them in new settings, like creating The Hills, a spin-off that follows original cast member Lauren Conrad on her road to independence in LA.
However these approaches do little to entertain those who are not fans of reality television. Networks it seems are ignoring the creative process and sacrificing story quality at the same time. Those who watch reality television cite reasons such as being able to relate to the real-life dramas of many of the characters and enjoying seeing “regular” people on television. But those who enjoy shows with engaging story lines and complex characters increasingly have less quality scripted programming to choose from. How has it come to the point that the easiest way to create programming has also become the fastest way to maximize profits?
One of the reasons, network executives say, is that scripted shows are often drawn out far too long, and will eventually lose steam because storylines become unrealistic or repetitive. They claim that continuing the same franchise, but altering the cast or minor details, will prevent audiences from getting bored with stale characters and situations. Certain shows like Friends can remain popular for many seasons, but chiefly because the ensemble cast was large enough, and the characters were given room to develop and change, so that viewers were able to create a bond with the show and remain interested and invested what happened each season. But when Friends ended, and Joey was created to take its place, the spin-off flopped. The single character was not enough to sustain the affection viewers had for the entire cast, with whom they had remained loyal for ten years. Reality programming is different because, as a rule, most characters only last one season, and are not around long enough for most viewers to develop a strong bond: the characters are introduced, they play the game, they win or they lose, and then they move on, and so does the audience, until the next season, and the next brand new cast.
Programming done this way is a means to simply maximizing profits, and the method of rotating casts or exploiting hyper-notorious characters tricks viewers into thinking they are watching something fresh, when in fact it is the same-old. Until audiences become de-sensitized to this maneuver, and demand to be taken seriously, quality television will continue to take a back seat.