One of the biggest TV screw-ups ever?

[MarcB]

Obviously this wasn't as big as "The Heidi Bowl", but this has to be one of the biggest screw ups ever.

I've been reading old issues of The Southington Observer Newspaper online, which the Southington Public Library uploaded.

In the September 1, 1988 issue there is a story about a major screw-up at WHCT TV 18 - a very low-budget station in Hartford, CT.

Mr. Art Secondo then owner of The Hall of Fame Lounge a sports-bar in Southington bought 3 commercial spots for Public Service Announcements about the dangers of Drinking and Driving and Consumption of Alcohol by Minors to air during a Mothers Against Drunk Drivers true-life movie about the death of a woman that was killed in a drunk-driving accident.

Secondo said that in the commercial break right after the scene where the car crash occurred Channel 18 ran a beer commercial. And instead of airing his 3 Public Service Announcements they aired commercials for Secondo's Hall of Fame Louge.

The story starts of Page one with the headline: Bar Owner Upset: Commercial Backfires. And then the article is continued on Page 18.
http://southingtonlibrary.org/PDFFiles/newspapers/1988/09_1_1988.pdf

 

[FredLeonard]

Biggest screw up? Not even close. So, bar owner who is getting hauled before the liquor control board after cops find minors in his car - and who has previously run spots promoting his drinking establishment on the station - decides to run paid "editorials" during a TV movie about a girl killed by a drunk driver? And he's upset because they ran one of his regular spots instead! Sounds like Karma. This was a blatant PR move and a very hypocritical one at that.

So, what happened? Did he lose his liquor license anyway?

NBC did the right thing with Heidi. Before the NFL became so almighty powerful, the networks should have gotten together and forced them to end games on or before the scheduled time. And this was even before it took more than a half hour to play the last two minutes and most games were completed in far less time than today.

CBS should have pulled the plug on that golf tournament Sunday night and put it on CBS Sports Channel for anybody who wanted to see the end. And if people are willing to watch golf on TV, maybe somebody should launch a channel where you can watch paint dry.

 

[firepoint525]

NBC did the right thing with Heidi. Before the NFL became so almighty powerful, the networks should have gotten together and forced them to end games on or before the scheduled time. And this was even before it took more than a half hour to play the last two minutes and most games were completed in far less time than today.

I would agree with this. It seems like the nets actually WANT football to run late because it apparently helps their ratings. My mother always complains about CBS programming running late on Sunday nights because of football delays, and my parents' generation (CBS' target audience, apparently) is probably the LEAST likely to look for delayed shows online.

CBS should have pulled the plug on that golf tournament Sunday night and put it on CBS Sports Channel for anybody who wanted to see the end. And if people are willing to watch golf on TV, maybe somebody should launch a channel where you can watch paint dry.

I agree, but golf on TV serves its purpose. It reminds me that I have not taken my Sunday nap yet! And it fills up airtime that would otherwise be larded down with infomercials!

 

[mvcg66b3r]

More TV screw-ups (the Heidi Bowl is No. 10 on this list):
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.p...hinkingThe100DumbestEventsInTelevisionHistory

 

[Joe_Capitano]

... And it fills up airtime that would otherwise be larded down with infomercials!

Particularly here in the west. The Seattle affiliate (KIRO), for instance, loves to roll infomercial manure Saturdays and Sundays fore and/or aft the CBS Sports block. Sometimes a few hours worth of them.

 

[ixnay]

More TV screw-ups (the Heidi Bowl is No. 10 on this list):
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.p...hinkingThe100DumbestEventsInTelevisionHistory

Adding Scooby-Doo's nephew Scrappy-Doo to that property is #7 on the list. I was never a big Scooby fan anyway and I thought Scrappy was annoying. H-B had/has a lot of cuter canines than Scoob' , starting with Huck, Augie Doggie and Doggy Daddy (and even going back to Spike and Tyke, if you want to include Bill and Joe's work on the MGM Tom and Jerry shorts before they formed their own studio).

ixnay

 

[FredLeonard]

Some idiotic "breaking news" interruptions should be considered screw ups, too.

Like the time CBS cut into the end of a show to announce some European politician died (natural causes) and nobody got to see the end of the whodunit - which ended right before the 11pm news.

Or the time CBS preempted the season-ending cliff-hanger of Dallas, half-way through, so everybody could watch some Chinese official ordering CBS out of the country.

Or the time ABC decided at the last minute to move a serial drama up one hour so they could run a news special in its time slot (and people tuned in to see the show they planned to watch was ending).

And then there's NBC cancelling Star Trek.

 

[Tim from Springfield IL]

Some idiotic "breaking news" interruptions should be considered screw ups, too.

Like the time CBS cut into the end of a show to announce some European politician died (natural causes) and nobody got to see the end of the whodunit - which ended right before the 11pm news.

Or the time CBS preempted the season-ending cliff-hanger of Dallas, half-way through, so everybody could watch some Chinese official ordering CBS out of the country.

Or the time ABC decided at the last minute to move a serial drama up one hour so they could run a news special in its time slot (and people tuned in to see the show they planned to watch was ending).

And then there's NBC cancelling Star Trek.

Along those lines, you could also add Fox's practice of still scheduling programs (even ones that weren't reruns) during the Sunday 7/6 time slot especially from about 2004-06 even during the weeks they would have an NFL doubleheader which usually went at least a half-hour over its alloted time. Then you'd have the postgame, at least 5 minutes worth of commercials, the show intro (e.g, Simpsons, Malcolm in the Middle, King of the Hill, Family Guy), more commercials, then the disclaimer: "Due to the length of the game we are now joining this regularly scheduled program in progress." Sometimes with as little as 5-10 minutes left before 8 ET/7 CT. On the predecessor boards to this we almost always had a discussion post nearly every Sunday about the latest Fox Sunday night program "delay" due to football.

 

[mvcg66b3r]

Another screw-up not on the list: NBC picking up the controversial series The Playboy Club, when it should have aired on cable. It was never cleared on KSL in Utah, and got canceled after just three episodes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Playboy_Club

 

[mvcg66b3r]

Also from TVTropes: Shows that were "so bad, they're horrible."
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Horrible/LiveActionTV
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Horrible/WesternAnimation

 

[Avid Listener]

Given the fact that entire books could be filled with all of the screw-ups that have happened on TV since the first broadcasts, a minor embarrassment about the scheduling of a TV commercial on some obscure little station in the backwaters of New England would barely make the top 500. A more accurate title would be "One of the most petty, though marginally amusing, TV screw-ups on a minor local station back in 1988".

 

[onairb]

A better example might have been NBC fouling up in 1978, broadcasting the wrong part of a miniseries for 17 minutes before catching the error. Of course, NBC in 1978 was an even bigger joke than the modern-day network, and had so few viewers that most people didn't even notice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ktmt9UrPPsE

The program itself, 'Loose Change', is so obscure, it's only brought up in the context of this technical glitch.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Another screw-up not on the list: NBC picking up the controversial series The Playboy Club, when it should have aired on cable. It was never cleared on KSL in Utah, and got canceled after just three episodes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Playboy_Club

I'm sorry, but I call "foul" on that swing. A screw-up is, by definition, something that went wrong causing something other than what was scheduled to air.

This was simply a case of bad network judgment. (I also call the links to TV Tropes off-topic by the same definition.)

 

[davideduardo]

... and my parents' generation (CBS' target audience, apparently) is probably the LEAST likely to look for delayed shows online.

I think you are wrong about what CBS's target truly is. TV is an 18-49 world. CBS leans old, mostly because of its higher percentage of scripted shows vs. reality, sports and comedies.

There are relatively few network TV buys against audiences over 55.

Shows are renewed or canceled based on 18-49, even when they have large 55+ viewership.

About two years ago, there was considerable talk about CBS's efforts to make 35-64 a primary TV buying demographic. They supposedly were talking with not just agencies but with the major advertisers who determine the demographic targeting of media buys in an effort to convince them of the buying power of 55-64 year old.

But I have heard nothing about the progress or success of this effort. And that makes me think it has not been very successful. Too bad, because any increased interest in 55-64 would have trickled down to local TV and radio as well.

But, for the moment, CBS has to target 18-49 just like the other networks.

 

[landtuna]

Too bad, because any increased interest in 55-64 would have trickled down to local TV and radio as well.

The networks are going to lose the opportunity to target the older demo. The Boomers are apparently the last generation who are going to inherit any significant amount of money as they age. Those that come after them will be, as a group, much poorer and even less likely to respond to advertiser's commercials (except perhaps those things that apply directly to them).

 

[nomadcowatbk]

The networks are going to lose the opportunity to target the older demo. The Boomers are apparently the last generation who are going to inherit any significant amount of money as they age. Those that come after them will be, as a group, much poorer and even less likely to respond to advertiser's commercials (except perhaps those things that apply directly to them).

research (done over 50 years ago) says geezers are set in their buying habits, but young whippersnappers are more receptive to advertising

 

[Avid Listener]

research (done over 50 years ago) says geezers are set in their buying habits, but young whippersnappers are more receptive to advertising

That research is old, outdated, and no longer accurate. Each new generation that comes along is different from the generations that preceded it for the entire lifespan of the generation. The Greatest Generation did get set in its buying habits. That data was accurate when it measured the Greatest Generation. But that is not an accurate observation of Baby Boomers, and probably won't be an accurate description of Generations X or Y or the Millennials. Most Baby Boomers who observe such things will tell you that our parents wouldn't change brands or stores for any reason, while we are still open to buying alternative brands or shopping at different stores. We Baby Boomers were the first generation to be barraged with ads for competing products. Our loyalty to any given brand in usually non-existent when compared to the way our parents stuck with their favorite products.

Anyone who rejects advertising to Baby Boomers because of research done on an earlier generation is a fool.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Anyone who rejects advertising to Baby Boomers because of research done on an earlier generation is a fool.

Wow, you said something I can agree with.

The problem is that the advertising community, for whatever reason, refuses to look at the question again. Even though what you said is proven day to day in the marketplace, they cling to the research that applied to a preceding generation.

This site, geared toward marketing to the Boomers, gets it right, if only Madison Avenue would notice:
http://www.boomertising.com/

Meanwhile, as someone who is making their name by programming a classic rock hits format that skews toward the older end of the 25-54 demographic, I will tell you that at least one of my stations essentially ignores the ratings and sells based on proven results with previous advertisers and the level of audience involvement at outside promotions. They have very little national agency buys, but their local ad sales have more than doubled in the past six months.

We can only hope that with overall numbers becoming more fragmented across both old and new media the ad agencies will develop a strategy that markets to all age groups, if for no other reason than to preserve their place in the food chain.

 

[CTListener]

That research is old, outdated, and no longer accurate. Each new generation that comes along is different from the generations that preceded it for the entire lifespan of the generation. The Greatest Generation did get set in its buying habits. That data was accurate when it measured the Greatest Generation. But that is not an accurate observation of Baby Boomers, and probably won't be an accurate description of Generations X or Y or the Millennials. Most Baby Boomers who observe such things will tell you that our parents wouldn't change brands or stores for any reason, while we are still open to buying alternative brands or shopping at different stores. We Baby Boomers were the first generation to be barraged with ads for competing products. Our loyalty to any given brand in usually non-existent when compared to the way our parents stuck with their favorite products.

Anyone who rejects advertising to Baby Boomers because of research done on an earlier generation is a fool.

I'm a recently turned geezer (four years into nonpersonhood to Madison Avenue) and I can tell you my brand loyalty is nil. I buy only store brand generics for just about all my food purchases now -- at places like Aldi and Ocean State Job Lot, not Stop & Shop and Wal-Mart. I see lots of folks my age or thereabouts doing the same thing. Advertisers must despise me.

 

[K.M. Richards]

I'm a recently turned geezer (four years into nonpersonhood to Madison Avenue) and I can tell you my brand loyalty is nil. I buy only store brand generics for just about all my food purchases now -- at places like Aldi and Ocean State Job Lot, not Stop & Shop and Wal-Mart. I see lots of folks my age or thereabouts doing the same thing. Advertisers must despise me.

Ssssshhhhhhhh ... you'll set us back years in convincing Madison Avenue to expand advertising age brackets!