These Are The Voyages - Season Three

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.

 

We've discussed before the fact that man was walking on the moon. Once that sunk in, don't you think that it altered peoples' perception of how plausible TOS was?

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).

TAS was probably also another factor feeding into TOS's popularity.

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.

 

Neil

 

All that was needed was the "Oh, Yeahhhh!"

 

The moon landing was hyped during the run-up. After a landing or two, it was ho-hum.

Why Trek became a phenomenon? Tastes change. Lightning in a bottle. Probably seven different factors. I'm glad I was a kid during that phase!

 

On a semi-related note, I'm always amused by the parallels between Roddenberry's problems with NBC regarding Star Trek, and the recent issues Dan Harmon had with them over Community. History sort of repeated itself.

 

Precisely.

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but my first exposure to TOS was as a six year old watching Maryland/DC's WBFF, Fox 45 every afternoon after school back in the '80s. It wasn't really appointment television for me at first, but I did quite enjoy it when I was able to get home in time to see it.

This. Oh, so very much this.

 

I think I started watching Trek in 1971 or 72 when I was 4. I was instantly hooked and I remember it being on just about every day. Early enough for me to see it with my mom and my sister, long before I had to go to bed (my dad too when he wasn't working). Then, later, watching it back to back with Space:1999 on Saturday or Sunday. I do recall Trek being on 6 days a week for a time and TV Guide was cooperative enough to list episode titles and descriptions.

Also, my uncle provided us with an antenna rotor which we could rotate the antenna to get signals from Connecticut. So I got to see Trek on WPIX in NY, then WTNH and WTXX in Connecticut. Connecticut ran them uncut. WTNH ran the next episode previews, which was the first time I saw them.

I guess my point is, kids my age never saw it first run. It was on all the time in syndication and at times we could see it. I can't speak for anyone else, but I got my family into it. They watched it because I was obsessed with it. Then they fell in love with it, too. My sister and I still go to Trek movie revivals. She and I couldn't see TWOK together for some reason in 1982, but when it was shown in NYC a few years ago, we went together and finally filled that one in. Star Trek was one my whole family shared.

A tangent there, sorry... But damn, I miss the syndie days.

 

Sounds a lot like me only I started a year or two earlier.

 

Syndication often positioned Star Trek into time slots where it wasn't up against heavy competition and at hours where the whole family wasn't sitting in front of the tube arguing over what to watch. If the show is on late afternoons after school but before dad gets home and wants to see Cronkite, the kids are going to be able to watch it undeterred. That was surely a factor in its being seen more easily.

 

Here's the average share recorded for the NBC premiere of each episode of TOS according to the data presented in TATV Volumes 1-3. I used the "Neilsen National" numbers to get the average as often as possible.

A couple of notes :
There was no data for the premiere of "Wolf In The Fold" on December 22 1967.
In case you are wondering which episode attracted the enormous spike on March 15 1968, it was the Ides of March screening of "Bread and Circuses" -- perhaps the Enterprise should have visited Planet IV-892 every week
The last "Tammy Grimes show" aired in September 29 1966, pulling a 17.1 share and earning it a swift cancellation. If only it had stayed on the air...TOS seemed to do quite nicely against it.
If there was any doubt TOS would be cancelled after its third season, its performance from Christmas 1968 onwards would have sealed its fate I'd say.

 

Ranking the show against the other new shows on NBC in 1966-67, here's where it placed:

21. Dragnet 1967
27. Tarzan
42. The Monkees
52. Star Trek
64. Occasional Wife
67. Hey, Landlord
69. The Girl from U.N.C.L.E.
(Below 70th, in no special order, as precise numbers are unavailable)
The Roger Miller a Show
Captain Nice
The Road West
The Hero
T.H.E. Cat

Star Trek was the lowest rated program on this list to be renewed; everything below it was cancelled by NBC. In regards to a better timeslot, Star Trek already had a top thirty show as its lead-in (Daniel Boone, 25th) and, following the swift cancellation of The Hero, a top thirty show as its lead-out (Dragnet 1967, 21st). Yet, on average, it wasn't breaking the top fifty.

I know Cushman reports that Star Trek was a "top 40" hit during the 1966-67 season, but the true National Nielsens do not support this claim. The "National Nielsen ratings" that he reports in the book are actually drawn from a sample of the thirty largest U.S. Television markets. Withholding one or two exceptions, he doesn't report the true National Nielsen ratings at all, either because he doesn't understand how the ratings worked (which is possible, as he admits this in his introduction) or because they destroy his argument (since Star Trek was far less popular in rural areas than the cities, and usually saw its ratings and share fall once the National Nielsens came in).

Cushman has also claimed that Star Trek was NBC's top-rated Thursday night show (here, for example: http://trekmovie.com/2013/10/27/exclusive-interview-with-these-are-the-voyages-author-marc-cushman/). Looking at the year end ratings averages, though, Star Trek was actually the lowest rated show NBC had on the air that night (even The Dean Martin Show at 10pm was a hit, at 14th, which meant that every show NBC had on in prime time that night was a top thirty hit EXCEPT Star Trek).

Finally, regarding the Friday night 8:30pm time slot, I think it's a mistake to characterize it as a "Friday Nigh hole." The Man From U.N.C.L.E. beat Star Trek in that spot in 1966-67 (it was 46th, and renewed, that season) and the lead-in (Tarzan, 27th) was a top-rated action adventure program that appealed to younger audiences. You can see why NBC tried pairing it up with Star Trek. Unfortunately, Tarzan tanked in its second (and final) season. But, hindsight is 20/20. NBC surely wasn't dissapointed that it moved Star Trek from its Thursday night time slot, though. Star Trek's replacement, Ironside, was a top thirty hit in 1967-68, and went on for an eight season, 199 episode run.

 

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.

You're absolutely right about NBC probably being thrilled at the switch from Star Trek to Ironside. Some shows succeed and others fail. I am not trying to put forward the idea that NBC was plotting to doom Star Trek. But I am expressing a deep skepticism with the position of the retired network executives who subsequently said that they loved and believed in Star Trek, and that they did their level best to make it a hit. Networks have done that for some shows--Hill Street Blues is a good example that worked and Arrested Development is a good example that didn't--but I don't see that NBC did much more than throw Star Trek out there and see if it would stick, apart from the third season renewal which certainly could have gone the other way.

 

I don't quite follow. The Man From U.N.C.L.E was actually floundering on Friday nights at 8:30 (even though it was doing comparatively better than Star Trek). The previous season (1965-66) it had been on at Friday nights at 10:00 -- the so-called death slot -- but was actually the #13 rated show on the air. When the network moved it earlier in the night in 1966-67, and gave it a better rated lead-in than before (Tarzan versus Mister Roberts), it fell to #46.

 

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?

 

How did the budget of UNCLE compare to Trek's?

 

Good question! And the network license fee also. There could have been other motives behind NBC's choices...

 

Ah, okay. We're in total agreement here.

I must admit, I've seen very little of The Man From U.N.C.L.E., so I cannot speak to it with much authority. What I've read online and in contemporary reviews suggests the show had a serious creative downturn in season three, going from a mostly serious spy show to pure camp.

And, to be nit picky (hey, we're Star Trek fans!) you mean the ratings would have dropped regardless after the second season, no? The show wasn't a great ratings success in its first season, but in its second season it was in the top thirty.

You'll have to clarify where you're getting the "special treatment" claim from. I think Maurice's read is probably the correct one.

I'll say this. NBC liked the show enough to order a second pilot, rather than cut their losses. They liked the show enough to order 16 episodes for season two, despite a first season that had mediocre viewership. And despite the fact that season two of Star Trek was killed in the ratings, they ordered a complete second season, even following it with a third season. Outside of the first 3-4 episodes of the series, the audience was just never there on NBC to support the show.