The fact that TOS did so well in syndication and not long after going into syndication leads me to wonder about what was happening while the show was in production. And it's popularity even grew over the years in syndication.
Regarding the ratings question I'll admit I don't completely understand how it all worked. But I will say that I sense the show's performance was painted in the worst possible light and that it's performance was possibly undereported to serve a particularly viewpoint. No matter which way one sees it doesn't matter a whit because nothing is changed by it.
History is the ultimate arbiter because no matter what one thinks of Star Trek's original run it ultimately won out in the long run. From the moment it went into syndication it became a success. Or maybe it simply began to really illustrate how it had been succeeding all along.
Regarding the ratings question I'll admit I don't completely understand how it all worked. But I will say that I sense the show's performance was painted in the worst possible light and that it's performance was possibly undereported to serve a particularly viewpoint. No matter which way one sees it doesn't matter a whit because nothing is changed by it.
History is the ultimate arbiter because no matter what one thinks of Star Trek's original run it ultimately won out in the long run. From the moment it went into syndication it became a success. Or maybe it simply began to really illustrate how it had been succeeding all along.
Neil
The moon landing was hyped during the run-up. After a landing or two, it was ho-hum.
Regarding the ratings question I'll admit I don't completely understand how it all worked. But I will say that I sense the show's performance was painted in the worst possible light and that it's performance was possibly undereported to serve a particularly viewpoint. No matter which way one sees it doesn't matter a whit because nothing is changed by it.
History is the ultimate arbiter because no matter what one thinks of Star Trek's original run it ultimately won out in the long run. From the moment it went into syndication it became a success. Or maybe it simply began to really illustrate how it had been succeeding all along.
Neil
Plus, people too young to have watched TOS first run, like me, were getting hooked on the show in syndication. Syndication meant that it was airing in the afternoon, at least at times, when children could dictate what was on (or at least more so than at other times, and with Mom's approval).
History was dynamic, and that was a particularly significant time in American and world history. No matter what the relative significance of the different factors were, you can't assume that audience values were constant in the 1970s. They really weren't. You can't assume that something succeeding in the 1970s meant that it should also have succeeded a few years before.
The thesis that the show was a ratings hit is deeply misguided, but the numbers show that in its first season it was a borderline show when compared to other new NBC shows (a reasonable basis for comparison). At that point, they could have moved it somewhere better and given it the best possible chance to improve its status by delivering it to its demographic audience. Instead, they used it to fill a Friday night hole.
The Man From UNCLE is actually a perfect example of the network choices to which I was referring. It did fine on Friday night at 8:30 and so they moved it to Monday nights at 8:00. UNCLE didn't succeed there, which may have been about the audience and may have been about creative changes in the show, but either way, NBC didn't see Friday at 8:30 as the ideal success slot for shows like that.
How did the budget of UNCLE compare to Trek's?
My fault. I meant "fine" in the same sense of Star Trek on Thursdays: not a hit, but not a disaster. I certainly don't think anyone at the UNCLE offices was complaining when they got the Monday at 8:00 slot.
But perhaps UNCLE is a strange example overall because of the faddish nature of the show. I suspect that with that one, the cast could have come to people's houses after the first season and the ratings were going to keep dropping.
But as to the larger question, do you think that Star Trek really got the special treatment that Herb Schlosser and Grant Tinker claimed it did for decades after?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.