Affiliates To ABC: Quit Yer Bi---in'

[DToTheJ]

With the Disney-owned network adding not one, but two, new series with the word "bitch" in the title, some affiliates in markets such as Pittsburgh are addressing some concerns. One GM says it makes viewers "mad".
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/ar..._Still_Want_Network_to_Stop_the_Bitch_ing.php

 

[FreddyE1977]

Not surprising. Pittsburgh is a pretty socially conservative town.
Heavily Catholic and our demographic skews towards the old.

Of course, if all these women are so upset about Limbaugh calling someone a slut,
they sure can't be happy with ABC yelling "Look at the b*tch!" every night during
prime time.

 

[DToTheJ]

I guess the real surprise here is that the infamous PTC crew was not referenced in that entire B&C piece!

 

[Markxxx]

The whole thing is stupid. If you have a show that has an objectionable word, just change the title.

It'd be like if you had a show about blacks and called it the 'N-Word Show." OK either suck it up and use the taboo word or change the title. Whether you say it or not we all know what "B" means and frankly it isn't that clever of a title that it couldn't be changed.

 

[Seltzer]

I say to WTAE TV....don't air the questionable shows. Just refuse to clear them.

 

[Nate Wesley]

Petty complaints, largely because ABC itself has gone out of its way to downplay the actual term when promoting the shows. In fact, I thought Don't Trust the B---- was cleverly titled so that people would remember the show (through rhyming 'B' with '23').

Specifically to GCB , that fake controversy has been flamed largely out of ignorance for the fictional novel that inspired it: "It's a liberal attack on Christianity--they'd never do a 'Muslim Bitches' show!" No on the Christianity attack part. Yes on the 'no Muslim Bitches' show--mostly because
1) someone would have to pitch one, which wouldn't be as likely seeing as how people got mad at a relatively harmless reality show featuring Muslim family life, and
2) even if you had #1, that story couldn't possibly be as funny.

(I also note that the GCB complainers specifically uses fictional Islamic women as their contrasting example, when they could have easily chosen Jewish or Catholic women to make their point...but that probably deserves separate unpacking.)

 

[bpatrick]

I say to WTAE TV....don't air the questionable shows. Just refuse to clear them.

As I said on the other thread concerning this show, this reminds me of the fracas
over "Soap" in '77, and, if most of you who were around then recall, there were a
number of pre-emptions, most based on inaccurate information that had somehow
gotten out before the show ever aired. So if stations are still licensed to serve "the
public interest, convenience, and necessity," and there are enough complaints about
the show, then I agree: WTAE should drop it. Thing is, networks and viewers tend to
get more hung up about political correctness than about language, sex, or violence, so
I don't see a mass exodus of affiliates away from this show.

 

[nathannah]

In the age where everything on primetime TV streams, it's getting much easier to realize that there are just going to be viewers that will only be happy when you have a primetime lineup clearing The Lutheran Hour seven nights a week. Nowadays you look silly if you pre-empt a show because the title or concept is offensive in your view, because the viewers are just going to get it anyways and ignore your alternate Andy Griffith or Best of Investigation 7 Reports programming and drag down your ratings. If you pre-empt these days, you're telling your audience 'We're treating you like a child and you don't get to watch this...hey! Why are you watching that show on the computer or other station?!'

In 2001 when stations were pre-empting Once & Again because of the Jessie/Katie storyline, even then it seemed petty and like a station was being pressured by a few people and not only ticking off more people that care about the show, but basically killing the show. Only for the stupidest programming concepts (like Married by America and Osbournes Reloaded, which were deservedly pre-empted by Fox stations because they were just terrible shows in the first place), or programming repeats where local content can be fit in without any consternation do I see pre-emption as a good thing.

As for the content of Apt. 23, it's well near 10pm. I've watched it and I've seen much worse on FX and Comedy Central. It's about the same on sexual humor as Happy Endings is. And look at S(tuff) My Dad Says; everyone tuned out because the show was terrible, not solely because of the title.

 

[DToTheJ]

I'm sure at some point, whether it's due to the "B" word in the title, or the rare extended length of the title, most listings sources will probably just choose to refer to the show as simply "Apt. 23"...

 

[bpatrick]

In the age where everything on primetime TV streams, it's getting much easier to realize that there are just going to be viewers that will only be happy when you have a primetime lineup clearing The Lutheran Hour seven nights a week. Nowadays you look silly if you pre-empt a show because the title or concept is offensive in your view, because the viewers are just going to get it anyways and ignore your alternate Andy Griffith or Best of Investigation 7 Reports programming and drag down your ratings. If you pre-empt these days, you're telling your audience 'We're treating you like a child and you don't get to watch this...hey! Why are you watching that show on the computer or other station?!'

In 2001 when stations were pre-empting Once & Again because of the Jessie/Katie storyline, even then it seemed petty and like a station was being pressured by a few people and not only ticking off more people that care about the show, but basically killing the show. Only for the stupidest programming concepts (like Married by America and Osbournes Reloaded, which were deservedly pre-empted by Fox stations because they were just terrible shows in the first place), or programming repeats where local content can be fit in without any consternation do I see pre-emption as a good thing.

As for the content of Apt. 23, it's well near 10pm. I've watched it and I've seen much worse on FX and Comedy Central. It's about the same on sexual humor as Happy Endings is. And look at S(tuff) My Dad Says; everyone tuned out because the show was terrible, not solely because of the title.

Earlier I made the comparison to the controversy over "Soap," but that was 35 years ago. People are more tolerant of content (and the early PR on "Soap" bore no relation to what was actually shown) than they were then. So I repeat: I don'tthink there will be a mass exodus of affiliates; however, if people tune out because the show isn't funny (and from what y'all are telling me that seems to be more like it) ABC will make that decision for them, and we know what that will be. But since Pittsburgh is the only example that has been cited where there seem to be issues over content, it will be interesting to see what WTAE does.

 

[Mario500]

In 2001 when stations were pre-empting Once & Again because of the Jessie/Katie storyline, even then it seemed petty and like a station was being pressured by a few people and not only ticking off more people that care about the show, but basically killing the show. Only for the stupidest programming concepts (like Married by America and Osbournes Reloaded, which were deservedly pre-empted by Fox stations because they were just terrible shows in the first place), or programming repeats where local content can be fit in without any consternation do I see pre-emption as a good thing.

Viewers and listeners should be not be denied to decide whether a program is good or not. As for repeats, folks who had not seen or heard the programs when they were new should not be denied additional chances to see or hear them.

As for the main topic concerning the two programs with the rude words, the creators of those programs should have been more concerned about possible reactions to the titles and how the programs would be promoted. I cannot imagine the most polite of folks being forced to refer to the programs by their full titles while discussing them.

The problems with the titles could have been avoided by replacing them with catchier and nicer titles. I would have suggested the titles "Apartment 23B" and a completely different title for "GCB".

 

[nathannah]

Earlier I made the comparison to the controversy over "Soap," but that was 35 years ago. People are more tolerant of content (and the early PR on "Soap" bore no relation to what was actually shown) than they were then. So I repeat: I don'tthink there will be a mass exodus of affiliates; however, if people tune out because the show isn't funny (and from what y'all are telling me that seems to be more like it) ABC will make that decision for them, and we know what that will be. But since Pittsburgh is the only example that has been cited where there seem to be issues over content, it will be interesting to see what WTAE does.

The other thing is Hearst is among the largest ABC affiliate groups, so it doesn't matter what WTAE's GM thinks in the end; they're likely stuck with the show no matter what because we're sadly in a post 1996/Communications Act world where corporate doesn't care about local opinion and has all their stations carry a show no matter what. Remember, the few show pre-emptions these days outside of revenue generation via infomercials and specials and more for content have all been large station groups, and not individual stations. There's a big lack of management willing to get a call from the home office these days because they pre-empted a show due to local concerns without clearing it with corporate (and of course, groups like Nexstar, Sinclair and Raycom look for any excuse to replace good management with bean counters; better to air everything and stay quiet).

 

[DToTheJ]

@Mrschmpf: Recalling your earlier point about "[Bleep] My Dad Says": I don't recall any CBS affiliates being up in arms about the title (just the PTC, as usual). Which is why I find it odd that longtime ABC affiliates like WTAE are ruffling their feathers over "Don't Trust The B---". I didn't hear a peep out of them when "GCB" went on the air. I guess it takes two to tango... :

 

[firepoint525]

In all the hubbub and controversy, it's been lost on everyone (including everyone here, so far) that GCB is 10,000 times better than PanAm, which it replaced. I should know, because I have watched both shows. I would have given up on PanAm, except that the wife liked it.

 

[Nate Wesley]

The problems with the titles could have been avoided by replacing them with catchier and nicer titles.

I may someday forget what the show was about, but I won't forget the title 'Don't Trust the B in Apartment 23' anytime soon. The rhyme makes is very catchy.

 

[DToTheJ]

If you think about it, "WKRP In Cincinnati" rhymes... Also, anyone remember "Top Cops"?