News CBS All Access Wants Emmys For Star Trek: Discovery

[Steven P Bastien]

Certainly it's true that premium channels have gotten awards, but those networks were born as pay networks. Standard networks (CBS, ABC, NBC) were not. My comment was meant to mean that, in my (admittedly distorted) opinion, CBS with this Star Trek series would be much better known and hence more likely to have accolades (not just awards but accolades of any kind) if they had put it on their normal network. I personally don't believe that just because an award officially is not based on popularity, that popularity does not have a subconscious influence, particularly for a Goliath like CBS. Perhaps a smaller network will get the David sympathy and not need the popularity.

This is not something I can prove, but I believe it to be true. It's just an opinion that can be food for thought.

 

[Greg Cox]

Certainly it's true that premium channels have gotten awards, but those networks were born as pay networks. Standard networks (CBS, ABC, NBC) were not. My comment was meant to mean that, in my (admittedly distorted) opinion, CBS with this Star Trek series would be much better known and hence more likely to have accolades (not just awards but accolades of any kind) if they had put it on their normal network. I personally don't believe that just because an award officially is not based on popularity, that popularity does not have a subconscious influence, particularly for a Goliath like CBS. Perhaps a smaller network will get the David sympathy and not need the popularity..

Popularity and prestige are not the same thing as far as awards are concerned. Lots of people watch NCIS and BLUE BLOODS or whatever on CBS. When was the last time they had brought home buckets of Emmys? And, honestly, when was the last time CBS aired a space-adventure series that lasted more than one season? LOST IN SPACE back in the sixties? DISCO is simply not the kinda show CBS airs these days, so why put STAR TREK on it.

Despite the names, CBS and CBS All-Access are not the same thing. CBS didn't turn into CBS All-Access; the new service is its own thing. Different audiences, different expectations. DISCO was never intended to be aired on an old-fashioned broadcast network. It was created expressly to help launch a new streaming service.

To put it another way, CBS didn't need STAR TREK. CBS All Access did. So . . .no CBS All Access, no new STAR TREK show.

It was always meant to be an experiment, like airing TNG in first-run syndication back in the late eighties.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

I agree, it is an experiment. Maybe even it could be called a gamble. I don't blame a business for trying it. It is too early to predict how it turns out. It seems to me that putting STD on payed access diminished the audience, and maybe alienated some of the fan base. They also are missing pulling in some new fans with a broader audience available on TV.

I was talking to my brother and sister on Mother's Day and they were both complaining about their 200 dollar per month cable bills. I told them I bought an antenna for 18 dollars and get 41 channels for free. They are thinking about doing the same. Just about every one I talk to at work complains about their cable bill. Now, we have Netflix, Amazon, CBS and other services. If we want those, we pay even more. Personally, I never minded watching commercials. I do have Amazon Prime because I buy lots of books, so I get the free shipping and video access and don't mind that. It will be interesting to see what the future holds. I'm an old guy and the youngsters will drive the market I think.

 

[Jayson1]

Well I think Wiseman should maybe get a supporting nod but that is about it. Not even totally sure about this one. Of course they could could "Glee" themselves into a trick nod. Like when "Glee" got nominated for being a comedy. Perhaps they could run as a limited series or mini-series. For some reason "American Horror Story" always ends up in that category for reasons I don't understand.


Jason

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Her winning would be like Max Von Sydow (another good actor) winning for his turn as Ming the Merciless.

He was just so perfect, though....

 

[Rahul]

(also had to look up what it means, lol)

"Make the Empire Great Again!"

 

[Jayson1]

How can this be the most Woke Trek ever? Even after TNG did a whole episode were the crew coudn't enter REM sleep.

Jason

 

[Wulfsa]

They should give us Fans an meh mimimi award...

 

[Noname Given]

Certainly it's true that premium channels have gotten awards, but those networks were born as pay networks. Standard networks (CBS, ABC, NBC) were not. My comment was meant to mean that, in my (admittedly distorted) opinion, CBS with this Star Trek series would be much better known and hence more likely to have accolades (not just awards but accolades of any kind) if they had put it on their normal network. I personally don't believe that just because an award officially is not based on popularity, that popularity does not have a subconscious influence, particularly for a Goliath like CBS. Perhaps a smaller network will get the David sympathy and not need the popularity.

This is not something I can prove, but I believe it to be true. It's just an opinion that can be food for thought.

Um, CBSAA isn't a TV network (no more than Amazon Prime or Netflix are <--- BOTH of which have shows that have gotten Emmy nominations and awards.)

 

[Steven P Bastien]

Um, CBSAA isn't a TV network (no more than Amazon Prime or Netflix are <--- BOTH of which have shows that have gotten Emmy nominations and awards.)

Well, if you are going to use logic on me, what chance do I have?

Another way to make my point is to make an analogy and compare the situation with sports. I'm a sports fan for as long as I've been a Star Trek fan (since the late 1960s). I live in New England and the Patriots, Red Sox, Bruins and Celtics are the home teams for me. Back in the day we would watch the home teams on TV, and we still do.

Fast forward to today and we have the internet and cable providing additional content for the sports fans. I think that is wonderful. It's the best of both worlds. In the old days I would have to read the paper to hear about game results across the country and now I can actually watch the games. It cost something, but it is a new thing that I didn't have before.

Fast forward to tomorrow and we may find that the home team games are not free any more. The businesses decided they can make more money forcing fans to pay for viewing their home team. Well, when that happens, I'm no longer a professional sports fan. It's not a logical decision, but an emotional one. They built their company on the fans, and then they sold us out, in my view.

So, I view this STD thing as something similar. CBS has a huge fan base with Star Trek, and this was built up because we watched it like we watch the "home team". Then they took it away because of a new business model. It's fine to have CBS access providing new stuff that we can decide to pay for, but they also took away the home team and make us pay for that too. Their value with Star Trek comes from the fans that make it valuable. So, they sold us out in my view.

You can cut me to pieces with logic, but I'll still feel justified in being emotional about the situation.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

If it wins, that will mean they’re vindicated in all the choices they’ve made (story, characters, arcs, mirror universe, reboot). They’ll keep making it like that.

They gave Michael a medal at the end of season 1.

And life will imitate art.

 

[Jayson1]

Even if one loves the show how can anyone with a straight face not say that their isn't 5 people or shows better than this one. The competion is just to strong for the show to really get any respect.

Jason

 

[Greg Cox]

Fast forward to tomorrow and we may find that the home team games are not free any more. The businesses decided they can make more money forcing fans to pay for viewing their home team. Well, when that happens, I'm no longer a professional sports fan. It's not a logical decision, but an emotional one. They built their company on the fans, and then they sold us out, in my view..

The difference is that, sticking with this analogy, there haven't been any "home games" since ENTERPRISE was cancelled thirteen years ago. And the only reason we have "home games" again is because CBS needed something to launch their new service.

It's not as though the the games were going to take place anyway, but they just decided to start charging for them out of the blue. Free or otherwise, the games have been gone for more than a decade, so nothing was taken from you that hadn't already vanished way back in 2005, when Bush was still President.

And, honestly, the reason the old stadium closed and games went away was because not enough sports fans were tuning in for the games anymore. It's not like the fans had stuck with the team through thick and thin, and then the managers abruptly "sold them out" by charging for tickets. The fans stopped watching, the games went out of business, and now they're trying to revive the team by using a new business model--because the old one wasn't working any longer.

Without streaming, there would be no games at all.

 

[BillJ]

Back in the day we would watch the home teams on TV, and we still do.

The Cincinnati Reds haven't been on free TV regularly for at least a decade. Sometimes the local station will show opening day. Fox Sports Ohio has owned the rights and will continue to for the foreseeable future.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

Well, that is interesting, and I didn't know. So, it is happening already. Just a matter of time before it all changes.

 

[Steven P Bastien]

Without streaming, there would be no games at all.

Well, I'm sure you are right and I am wrong. I just struggle to understand how they make a profit letting people pay for something they don't want for free. In modern times, we have a virtually unlimited number of channels on cable, and more potential on the internet. Youtube makes money on advertisements with free videos, but networks can't make the numbers work with something that already has a large fan-base.

The Reds fans won't watch a free game, but they will pay to see it? i guess the ones who are willing to pay are willing to pay a lot and make up for the smaller numbers of people watching? Oh, and do the players need to make that many millions of dollars, and do the franchises need to make so much money?

It seems like something is not right here. Or, maybe we will find that even the business models that have paying-customers (rather than paying-advertisers) don't work out in the end because of the cost of production of network-series and the cost of athletes/coaches/franchise-profits in sports.

 

[Greg Cox]

The Reds fans won't watch a free game, but they will pay to see it? i guess the ones who are willing to pay are willing to pay a lot and make up for the smaller numbers of people watching? Oh, and do the players need to make that many millions of dollars, and do the franchises need to make so much money?.

Old model: You showed the game for free, but paid for it via advertising. But then the big crowds stopped showing up, taking the big advertising dollars with them, so you need to find a new way to pay for any new games. Maybe charge admission this time around?

Six of one, half a dozen of another. It's a new approach, to be sure, but it would be a mistake to assume that the Powers That Be could have just as easily put DISCO on a free network if they'd wanted to. That didn't work for ENTERPRISE and a show on CBS would have needed even greater ratings to survive. The days when you could just throw a STAR TREK series on the air and it would automatically run for seven years ended more than a decade ago.

Might as well try a new approach. Otherwise:

"We want the product for free--like before."

"But we can't afford to do that anymore. How much are you willing to pay for it.?"

"Nothing!"

"Okay, then . . . "

 

[Refuge]

So, I view this STD thing as something similar. CBS has a huge fan base with Star Trek, and this was built up because we watched it like we watch the "home team". Then they took it away because of a new business model. It's fine to have CBS access providing new stuff that we can decide to pay for, but they also took away the home team and make us pay for that too. Their value with Star Trek comes from the fans that make it valuable. So, they sold us out in my view.

You can cut me to pieces with logic, but I'll still feel justified in being emotional about the situation.

You are right. For some strange reason I always thought Star Trek was meant for the everyman. Where did I get that notion from? An allegorical piece on social dynamics and utopia change. Each episode delightfully set in the future apparently irrelevantly, like a lesson to reflect present times whilst also being inspiring. SO why would the everyman no longer be the free audience?

It is a product and the market research supported its present platform.

 

[E-DUB]

I'll wait and get gouged on the DVDs.

 

[johnjm22]

Is there a TV equivalent of the Razzie Awards? Because that's about the only thing STD should win.

The show is so poorly made they spent over $100M and couldn't even get the special effects to look good, or the acting and dialog to feel natural.