Popular, long running, stories of any flavour — whether it be SF or Soap Opera — will always mine their past as part of their appeal. That can be done well, or it can be done poorly. X-Men was at the height of its popularity while having little notes telling you events were being referenced from twenty years back in its pages, whereas Eastenders has turned into weird thing where most of the cast are returned characters from decades back. For two examples. (Revealing Eastenders is in fact a Matrix simulation of Earth on Gallifrey would be the best way to end that show, given its odd Who links…)
Whilst there’s the argument that it’s unfair to expect a viewer to jump in and deal with a show that has a past (like some kind of weird virginal TV show is required, where everything to know is right in front of you…) and it has some weight, at the same time viewers have been doing *exactly that* for Decades. All the people who do enjoy continuity aren’t seventy year old British folk, who have been watching since sixty-three.
It’s one of the reasons why Who fandom is to a decent extent gatekeeper free — you’re more likely to find even the grumpiest current-iteration-disliking-fans are more likely to be inviting newer people to experience the old stories, than telling them to go away and find something else.
Which, with everything on iPlayer, and reams of info everywhere these days, is exactly what the show itself is doing when it sticks in the Rani, or Omega, or Susan.
The important thing for the show is — don’t get it wrong when you do that. Otherwise you accidentally look worse than something shot on a comparative shoestring in the nineteen seventies, and your high-salaried glossy superstar might look less compelling than a Liverpudlian Builder, or a Scotsman who used to put live animals down his trousers.
