Categorised | None

Tags | None

Who's ratings dropping, but why?

Posted on May 30, 2006 | 7 comments |

The Media Guardian tries to make sense of Doctor Who's falling ratings. But with so many variables and factors to consider, poor old Jason Deans comes across as needing a whiteboard and a book of tables.

All the same, weren't Who's ratings at around the 6.8 million mark this time last year as well?

Subscribe to the daily news by RSS or email

7 Comments

  1. Rullsenberg wrote:
    May 30, 2006 | Reply

    Yep, pretty certain. Am sure that the Gallifrey people have a note of it somewhere...

  2. Scott wrote:
    May 31, 2006 | Reply

    Is it worth pointing out that in today's TV industry, there's really no such thing as "only" a 32% share? :)

  3. Rob Buckley TypeKey wrote:
    May 31, 2006 | Reply

    Yes. And it'll probably be third-highest rated show of the week or something, after Corrie and EastEnders.

  4. Stu N wrote:
    May 31, 2006 | Reply

    Tricky to say; as you said, there are too many variables. This time last year we were later in the series and ratings were lower — according to OG, the second episode of The Doctor Dances at the end of May got a 6.17million average audience and a 35.9% audience share. And that was the second one of the 'Are you my mummy?" storyline which most people reckon was the best of the series. But Episode 7 in the run got 7.7million viewers. They aren't comparing like with like, and I don't know how they can draw anything meaningful from the figures.

    There seems to be a tendency for some critics to knock this series more than the last one, and the Guardian bloke would dearly love to be able to say that the fall-off is because the viewers haven't taken to the new series. I can't see any reason to do that, quality-wise. Both series have been equally patchy, but this series' highs so far (Sarah Jane, Madame de Pompadour) have matched last series', and the lows (Catnuns, disappointing Cybermen) haven't been anywhere near as embarrassingly bad as the farty aliens.

  5. Scott Matthewman TypeKey wrote:
    May 31, 2006 | Reply

    In addition to the MediaGuardian article you linked to, there's also this blog piece, in which Stephen Brook ties to pin any downturn in ratings to the fact he didn't like the episode, and that it contained an in-joke recognisable only to long-standing soap trivia buffs.

    Mind you, he was right about the "you fought a war" speech; it was a bit preachy...

  6. Rob Buckley TypeKey wrote:
    June 1, 2006 | Reply

    Outpost Gallifrey does a nice clear-up job that shows that ratings are up on last year!

  7. Scott Matthewman TypeKey wrote:
    June 1, 2006 | Reply

    Cool -- I'll add a link to that piece from my blog entry on the matter.

Leave a comment

Your comment


Comment preview

Subscribe to comments
You can subscribe to comments using one of the methods below:

Comments feed for this entry

Comments feed for the blog

Allowable comments
You can leave just about any kind of comment you like. You can argue, suggest I am (or anyone else is) wrong, leaving general messages of love – anything. However, you absolutely can't leave messages that are general insults or abusive: your comment will either be edited or deleted and you'll be barred from leaving any further comments. We want to keep it civil here.

Spoilers
If you're going to put something you think is a spoiler into one of your comments, put <spoiler> in front of it and </spoiler> after it; if your spoiler is long, remember to put the tags before and after every paragraph. Your spoiler will then only appear if anyone highlights it with their mouse. Remember: your comments also show up in the sidebar at the side of every page!

HTML and User pics
For details of what HTML you can use and how you can get a picture next to your comments, please read the comment guidelines, first.

Featured Articles

Rupert Penry-Jones tells all

Gone but not Forgotten