Why Didn't DS9 Have as Many Viewers as TNG?

[SoullessMinion]

In my market, the channel that aired DS9 (I forget which it was) scheduled it in the middle of the night. 1:35 AM or something ridiculous like that. Not exactly easy to catch in those pre-DVR days, and I was a kid in school back then. I imagine that kind of thing was a contributing factor.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I think TNG was more of a fluke than anything else. It came at the right time when there wasn't much sci-fi on the airwaves and being futuristic, it was different than what was currently on. By the time DS9 rolled around, it was actually competing against TNG in some markets and when VOY arrived, it kind of got lost in the shuffle with a slew of other adventure, fantasy, and sci-fi shows that had emerged too. DS9 wasn't the only game in town, not even for Trekkers.

 

[Arpy]

I love the series, but it had a certain somber tone that I think a lot of casual viewers weren't that thrilled to revisit.

It takes place post a horrific occupation, then a sinister war. Melodrama everywhere. People look to the future for hope and adventure, and DS9 gave them ho-hum and anguish.

If you're a sci-fi fan, you're on board, but those extra casual viewers got that on ER or Grey's Anatomy or what have you. Plus sex.

 

[Prax]

I didn't read all the pages of this thread, so this may have been said but, you can't judge the quality of a show simply by viewership ratings.

And when it comes to viewership ratings, there is such wide plethora of complex factors, like time slots, markets, competition, promotion, et al. Looking at a seasons average ratings is not necessarily helpful either.

Premiers, season premiers, season finales, and finales will garner higher rating because they are heavily promoted. Likewise for big budget 2-parters. TNG began with wide coverage, good time slots(depending on where), and almost no competition. I think the show caught on with general audiences. Even at the height of TNG(around season 6) it was still no where near the most popular show on TV.

Interesting facts:
Cheers(NBC) premiered in 1983. It's first season achieved ratings similar to TNG (10-13) and these were considered lousy. The second season saw ratings in the 20s and received ratings in the upper 20s in most of the later seasons. This was considered very very good.
The finale for cheers was watched by like 90 million people in 1993, the 11th most watch TV episode in history.

The Office premiered in 2005 and its first season averaged ratings of around 5 million people. This was considered lousy.
In 2012, The Office(in its final season)averaged about 4.2 million viewers. In 2012, The office was the highest rated sitcom on NBC!

 

[tomswift2002]

In my area, I remember the station that aired it had a number of big budget shows on at the time like TNG, seaQuest, Babylon 5, Lois & Clark, Thunder In Paradise, etc., that we only got the first 3 seasons at 10 p.m. on Mondays. However at the time the owners of the station were also selling it, so we lost a few shows due to the change over and DS9 was one of them.

 

[MacLeod]

In my market, the channel that aired DS9 (I forget which it was) scheduled it in the middle of the night. 1:35 AM or something ridiculous like that. Not exactly easy to catch in those pre-DVR days, and I was a kid in school back then. I imagine that kind of thing was a contributing factor.

We did have VHS recorders which made it possible to record programmes that aired when we wouldn't be able to watch them live. Sure we had to remember to set them each and every time but we managed

 

[Prax]

1 am would certainly destroy ratings in that particular area.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

The station that aired DS9 also aired TNG. Tween and later Teen Peach got a glut of sci-fi on Saturday nights...

 

[Farscape One]

I think it boils down to one thing... DS9 never got a season by itself. I think because of that, STAR TREK fans felt they could just not watch because they can get their fix watching another series. The only time it was by itself was the first 10 episodes of season 3.

Ironically, I think this actually is the reason why DS9 was such a great series... my personal favorite. Because the top dogs were so focused on TNG or VOY, they just left Behr pretty much alone to do his thing. Without quite the same constraints that seemed to lock the other shows, DS9 was able to push the franchise probably about as far as it could go at that time.

The lack of viewers was a blessing and a curse at the same time.

 

[MacLeod]

I love the series, but it had a certain somber tone that I think a lot of casual viewers weren't that thrilled to revisit.

It takes place post a horrific occupation, then a sinister war. Melodrama everywhere. People look to the future for hope and adventure, and DS9 gave them ho-hum and anguish.

If you're a sci-fi fan, you're on board, but those extra casual viewers got that on ER or Grey's Anatomy or what have you. Plus sex.

Other Sci-Fi shows which are darker in tone have done well

Buck Rogers (1979) took place post a Nuclear war on Earth.

B7 takes place in a Dystopia.

Dark Angel takes place in a world in the aftermath of an EMB bomb

Falling Skies has Aliens conquered the Earth

To name a few

 

[Prax]

That may just be a catch with TNG audiences. My mom was a big TNG fan, we watched it as a family growing up, but she didn't like DS9 when it came out.

I think most sci fi is dark, and that's what sets Star Trek(including DS9) apart sometimes. The only other sci fi show I saw around that time was X-Files, which was incredibly dark and successful. Of course, I never thought of it as sci fi back then.

Any analysis of viewership ratings has to account for "historical decline." TNG was more successful than TOS, but TOS had ratings in 30+ range. It was often the 2nd most watched program in its time slot. TNG never achieved those kinds of ratings, but there were more than 3 channels in 1990. In 1995, there were a great many more channels. Cable came about in the 80's. By the mid 90's, many of those cable channels were drawing enough viewers that they were producing original content. Anyone remember when MTV just showed music videos? Or a bunch of other channels that just showed old movies? HBO(Home Box Office), a premium cable channel, originally only showed (newer)movies. Likewise for Showtime. Now they produce all sorts of original content. Streaming services are now going through a similar evolution.

These were considered good ratings in..
1965 - 35-40
1985 - 20
2005 - 10(and below 3 was unprofitable for a show like Star Trek)
Now - 5

Ratings (from the 60's to 2000's)weren't even a very accurate way to know exactly how many are watching. They are simply useful for what networks can charge advertisers. I believe that may have changed with the switch to "digital broadcasting" around 2009.

Bottom line: DS9 was successful in the ratings game.

 

[Arpy]

Other Sci-Fi shows which are darker in tone have done well

Buck Rogers (1979) took place post a Nuclear war on Earth.

B7 takes place in a Dystopia.

Dark Angel takes place in a world in the aftermath of an EMB bomb

Falling Skies has Aliens conquered the Earth

To name a few

I don't think any of the shows listed had the cultural impact TNG. I'd have to check the ratings but those too may not have matched -- i.e. Dark Angel I remember was cancelled due to its ratings dip.

The thing about them really though (most of them?) is that though they had dark premises, most of them were pretty sexy fun shows. Buck was a stud in his day, and Jessica Alba and Jensen Ackles? Come on. I think there were different elements at play.

 

[tomswift2002]

Any analysis of viewership ratings has to account for "historical decline." TNG was more successful than TOS, but TOS had ratings in 30+ range. It was often the 2nd most watched program in its time slot. TNG never achieved those kinds of ratings, but there were more than 3 channels in 1990. In 1995, there were a great many more channels. Cable came about in the 80's. By the mid 90's, many of those cable channels were drawing enough viewers that they were producing original content. Anyone remember when MTV just showed music videos? Or a bunch of other channels that just showed old movies? HBO(Home Box Office), a premium cable channel, originally only showed (newer)movies. Likewise for Showtime. Now they produce all sorts of original content. Streaming services are now going through a similar evolution.

These were considered good ratings in..
1965 - 35-40
1985 - 20
2005 - 10(and below 3 was unprofitable for a show like Star Trek)
Now - 5

Ratings (from the 60's to 2000's)weren't even a very accurate way to know exactly how many are watching. They are simply useful for what networks can charge advertisers. I believe that may have changed with the switch to "digital broadcasting" around 2009.

Bottom line: DS9 was successful in the ratings game.

in The Making Of Star Trek Deep Space Nine by the Reeves-Stevens, they point out that the first season of TNG was seen on average by 17 million viewers, and they pointed out that in the late-1960's when TOS aired, 17 million viewers would mean death for a TV series, while in the late-80's it was high ratings.

But the Reeves-Stevens also point out that DS9 was on fewer stations than TNG in the US, and still managed to be in the Top 10 for Syndicated shows.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

Regardless of ratings relative to their times, the thing that jumps out at me when looking at graphs if their overlapping ratings is that TNG is basically rising and/or stable, as all other shows bleed viewers. It doesn matter if ratings 20 years prior mean something else if it implies interest is apparently dropping.

DS9 had crazy numbers for their pilot, then episode 2 dropped big time. This isn't a number of stations thing, people were turned off by what they saw, for whatever reason. I have a feeling setting up Sisko in a confrontational way to Picard did not help the fans of TNG at all.

Anecdotally, my parents love TNG, and bailed around season 2 or 3 of DS9.
Just as things were about to get good, sadly.

 

[nutshell]

Who was also watching Babylon 5???

 

[Prax]

bbbbbaabbylon what?

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Why Didn't DS9 Have as Many Viewers as TNG?

... No Gene Roddenberry.

As proven by how the first season of TNG was with him running things (and fucking it up), that's bullshit. DS9 only had a few clunkers in its first season compared to TNG, and its characters were somewhat better than TNG's personality-wise. Gene may have been great once on TOS, but on TNG, he was washed up, and it showed.

 

[Farscape One]

Who was also watching Babylon 5???

I did. I loved BABYLON 5, as well.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Who was also watching Babylon 5???

The show with stilted dialogue and colorblind-unfriendly special effects?

 

[Herbert]

If I remember correctly, I watched a few of the first season episodes but quickly lost interest. I also wasn't all that eager to watch a ST show that didn't take place on a ship. many years later though my feelings have changed and I want to watch the entire series