Is ABC becoming the "chick show" network? (Grey's Anatomy, Desperate Housewives)

TV Arts

ftseng2749aolcom
Well, seems like ABC is rapidly becoming the new Lifetime, that is, the
network for hit "chick shows."   Nearly every hit show ABC has right
now targets women.    It's biggest hit shows, "Grey's Anatomy" and
"Desperate Housewives," have soap opera-like styles and 2/3 of its
viewers are female, according to what I've read.    Its hit reality
show, "Dancing with the Stars," is also a "chick show" (how many guys
do you know are interested in watching ballroom dancing?).     The new
season of "The Bachelor" just premiered, its target demographic is
obviously women 18-34.   Plus its new shows, "Ugly Betty" and "Men in
Trees," also seem to have women as the target demographic.    Talk
about a boatload of "chick shows."

Now, with Monday Night Football gone to ESPN and "Alias" canceled,
seems like the only hit show on ABC that appeals to guys is "Lost."
Women must love ABC right now.   Guys, maybe not so much.  :)

-Frank
                                            
neon_06hotmailcom
I was talking to my brother about this. ABC is Chick night 5 nights a
week. Saturdays are football and wednesdays "Lost" / "The Nine"
They shouldn't of cancelled "Alias" should of kept the show for
Thursdays or Mondays at 10PM to help break apart all this female
powered shows. 
Hopefully they are aware of this before it's too late.
                                            
Kate
Not "should of," "should've," the contraction of "should have."

I know that comes across as grammar police, but that and spelling "all
right" as "alright" really bug me.

So what bugs you?

So what's wrong with female centered shows?  We make up more than half
the population, and spend more than half of the money.  We even buy
more pricey electronics than men do.

Go where the money is.

Kate
                                            
ftseng2749aolcom
I never said it was good or bad.   I just found it a very interesting
trend for ABC, just like the former WB targeted the younger teen
demographic for years.

-Frank
                                            
smkmirrorsaolcom
Too much anything is bad.

On the subject of women being more than half the population; according
to census.gov that "more" is very slight; and does NOT justifiy TV
programming that skews 70-90% female.

On free TV consider:
MyNetwork TV, ABC, CW all target overwhelmingly female demos.
CBS and NBC tip slightly female but are largely concerned with older
audiences.
That is no where near a male vs female population representation.

In going were the money is...men still make more than female
counterparts.
                                            
Obveeus
...yet crime investigation shows saturate the primetime schedules.


70%-90% is a made up number.  Look at all networks, not just some and you 
won't get that number.


So, one real network and two networks that pander to tiny audiences.


They tip female?  Are the crime procedurals, for example, female shows?


It doesn't matter who makes it.  It matters who spends it.  Even in families 
where both parents work, the woman is usually the one doing the 
cleaning/cooking/shopping/checkbook...thus she controls what the money is 
spent on.
                                            
Mark
This is a faded lie. Comparing people who have the same jobs and the
same experience reveals that women make considerably more than men.
Moreover it has been this way in the US since the 1950s.
                                            
Default
Citation? I've heard roughly equal, never "considerable more".




Brian
                                            
Mark
Do you consider 10% to be considerable? I'm looking at a secondary
source, but here are his references:

1. Women who set their own pay by owning their own business earn 49% of
their male counterparts earnings. U.S. Department of the Treasury,
Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income Division. Unpublished
Table E2-1, "Number of Male-Operated Sole Proprietorships by Six Broad
Industry Categories, 1985-2000"; Table E2-3, "Business Net Net Income
of Male-Operated Sole Proprietorships by Six Broad Industry Categories,
1985-2000"; Table E3-1, "Number of Female-Operated Sole Proprietorships
by Six Broad Industry Categories, 1985-2000"; and Table E3-3, "Business
Net Income of Female-Operated Sole Proprietorships by Six Broad
Industry Categories, 1985-2000".

2. Companies paid men and women equal money when their jobs were the
same. US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1981 Survey of Professional,
Administrative, Technical, and Clerical Pay (PATC survey).

3. Women and men who started at the same time as engineers, worked in
the same settings, with equal professional experience, training, family
status and absences received the same pay. Laurie A. Morgan,
"Glass-Ceiling Effect or Cohort Effect? A Longitudinal Study of the
Gender Earnings Gap for Engineers, 1982 to 1989," American Sociological
Review, 63 (August 1998); 479-493.

4. "Even during the 1950s there was less than a 2% pay gap between
never-married women and men; and never-married white women between 45
and 54 earned 106% of what their never-married white male counterparts
earned." US Census of Population: 1960, Subject Reports: Marital Status
(Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce), 112-113, Table 6.

5. Unmarried women who had worked every year since leaving school
earned slightly more than their male counterparts: Economic Report of
the President, Transmitted to the Congress January 1973 (Washington DC:
US Government Printing Office, 1973), 105.

6. Nationwide, women professors who had never been married and never
published earned 145% the income of their counterpart male colleagues.
Yes, the women earn 45% more than the men.  American Council on
Education data, cited in Thomas Sowell, Affirmative Action Reconsidered
(Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1975), 33, Table 7,
"Academic Year Salaries by Sex and Marital Status, 1968-69."

7. Earnings of Never-Married Men and Women who have never had children,
are college-educated, and work full-time, aged 40-64, the men earn 85%
of what the women do. (The opposite of the usual claim.) US Census
Bureau's Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2001 Panel,
wave 2. 

8. In 2004, a part-time working woman made 110% of what her male
counterpart made. Both groups worked an average of 20 hours a week. US
Bureau of the Census, unpublished data from Employment and Earnings,
Table D-20, "Median Weekly Earnings of Part-time Wage and Salary
Workers by Selected Characteristics."
                                            
Obveeus
The fact that so many guys are in denial about Lost being a chick show as 
well.


Yep.  That is what the advertisers want so ABC is doing a smart thing. 
Networks having a 'theme' is nothing new.


That is not something to brag about.
                                            
Obveeus
Lost is on ABC.  ABC is the 'chick show network'.  The poor little Lost 
followers just aren't ready to own up to the fact that they are 'chicks' 
deep down inside.
                                            
Kate
This is what in logic is known as a solipsism.

It's faulty logic, and therefore doesn't say anything.

Try again.

Kate
                                            
Obveeus
In comedy circles, we just call it 'poking the Lost fans with a big pointy 
stick'.


You Lost me.


Ok.  Lost fans are also delusional because they believe that every TV show 
with characters is now a copy off of 'their' show.  Since ABC is the 'chick 
network' this is further proof that 'chicks' are delusional.
                                            
rst
Let's face it, if you're watching ANY network drama or reality show,
you're a chick.
                                            
Kate
The entire discussion is macho posturing.  If you don't like it, don't
watch it - there's plenty of stuff on.

I'm just pointing out how illogical all these supposedly logical males
are.  Not one of you have given any argument supporting your thesis.  I
don't have to disprove it, you need to prove it - you're the one making
the assertion.

Kate
                                            
Obveeus
All you have proven is that you are fairly clueless when it comes to 
humor/sarcasm.


...and by what logic do you believe that assertions have to be proven to 
you?

I think you are Lost...Therefore, you are a 'chick'...Therefore you probably 
need to go back and learn your ABCs.
                                            
Kate
Oh, the purpose of this board is to be *sarcastic*!  I thought it was
to discuss television.  Silly me.


Ummmm.  Because otherwise any old statement can pass for truth.  Like
"The check's in the mail."  Or "There *are* WMDs."

Silly me, again.  I thought truth mattered.


And, of course, the main real objection to this is the implication that
TV should only appeal to men, that appealing to the greater half of the
population is somehow stupid and insulting.  

So go watch Spike.

Kate
                                            
Obveeus
Sometimes discussions involve sarcasm.


The truth is that ABC is seeking out a female audience more than a male one 
these days.  That much is fact.  Trying to dig up a few shows on ABC that 
don't primarily appeal to women won't alter the fact that most do.


There you go getting hysterical?  I wonder what the origin of that word is?


The guy from Buffy?  That was a chick show.
                                            
Kate
Involve or consist of?


OK, I agree that most do - but using the argument that ABC caters to
female viewers to bolster the assertion that *any* show (e.g. Lost) is
a chick show is circular, illogical and just plain wrong.  And the
assertion that catering to the larger portion (and the biggest spending
portion) of the population is bad, is also just plain wrong.  And
really bad business.


Yah, yah, more macho posturing.  And more insults.  The last resort of
a losing argument.


It's a network.  That caters to macho posturers.  Can't believe you
don't know what it is.

Kate
                                            
Obveeus
Involve...as in has some as needed.  If there was only sarcasm, then there 
wouldn't be a clueless person attempting to respond as if they wwere 
defending 'logic' against circular reasoning.


So when you were directly told that the comment claiming Lost was just 
'poking the Lost fans with a pointy stick', you still thought you had to 
make a claim against circular reasoning?  Later, when you were told the 
comment involved sarcasm you still thought you had to make a claim against 
circular reasoning?  Wow...I'm typing as slow as I can for you.


Sure, but you have shown a consistent inability to figure out which operson 
is saying what in this thread.


Trust me, I'm not losing.  You are arguing with yourself against an 
imaginary opponent that you claim believes Lost is a chick show because all 
ABC shows are chick shows.


Buffy is a network?  I disagree.  I think the Scooby gang could be called a 
network or friends that foguth evil, but Buffy and Spike were each no more 
than nodes.
                                            
WQ
--- Seriously, ABC's lineup speaks loudly and clearly for itself that
it's purely a sexist schedule that favors women.  If you can't see
that, then I guess you're a mite oblivious.   You want proof?

America's Funniest Home Videos - this probably has crossover appeal
Extreme Makeover: HE - tears, tears, tears aimed at hormonal women
Desperate Housewives - 4 loony women in goofy situations
Brothers & Sisters - sappy, emotionally manipulative interpersonal
relationship soap
Wife Swap - wifely household nightmares
The Bachelor - idiot women going after a loser guy
What About Brian - touchy-feely-gooey relationship stuff
Dancing with the Stars - realistically, more women are into dancing
than guys, regardless of the balanced picture you see on the show, and
they, along with gays, probably make up most of the viewers
Help Me Help You - ok, maybe this one has some crossover appeal, but it
does nothing for me
Boston Legal - quasi-legal pseudo-comedy soap
Lost - a overly-convoluted adventure soap that only women and gays can
love
The Nine - sappy, emotionally manipulative interpersonal relationship
soap
Ugly Betty - an ugly girl makes good
Grey's Anatomy - a woman's p.o.v. of medical life and the sappy, soapy,
emotionally manipulative interpersonal relationships in it
Six Degrees - sappy, emotionally manipulative interpersonal
relationship soap
Men in Trees - a woman in interpersonal relationship dilemmas
20/20 - primarily female-themed news stories
Saturday Night Football - Bingo! The only unquestionably real male
testosterone show on ABC the whole week - and I, as a male, hate
football!

Plus: a second installment of Dancing on Wednesday and repeats of
Grey's Anatomy on Friday.

By my count, ABC has only 1 bonafide male-geared show and 2 possible
crossovers amounting to just 4 1/2 hours out of 22, or about 20% of its
schedule.  Now, prove otherwise.
                                            
Kate
"ABC is a totally chick network." is your thesis - it is what you are
trying to prove.  You can't use your thesis as an argument to support
your thesis.  That's what a solipsism is.

Example:  Thesis - all birds can fly.
An ostrich is a bird, therefore ostriches can fly.

But, since ostriches *can't* fly, this actually disproves the thesis,
just as the fact that "Lost" appeals to men disproves the thesis that
ABC is a totally chick network.

So all it proves is that you can't think straight, or at least argue
straight.

If you want to prove that "Lost" is a chick show, or that ABC is a
chick network, you're going to have to do better than an circular
argument.

Kate
                                            
WQ

                                            
Kate
Hm, reversing a circular argument is still circular.  I'm not arguing
one side or the other, I'm just pointing out that your logic is so
faulty you haven't actually proved anything.

Care to start over?

Kate
                                            
WQ

                                            
Obveeus
You are mistaken.  Lost does not appeal to men.  Lost appeals to men that 
are actually 'chick'.  that is why Lost is on ABC.  I can't believe that you 
are still having trouble with this concept.


'Chicks' come from eggs.  The second letter of Lost is clearly an egg. 
Further proof that ABC is the 'chick' network and that Lost is a 'chick' 
show.
                                            
Steven
Oh, brother.
The geek fans who love Lost the most, the ones who download the 
screencaps and argue endlessly about theories, are 90% male.

Lost is a *geek* show.  And most geeks are guys.  Even today.  As Damon 
Lindelof himself has acknowledged.


"I think male brains like to figure things out. We're problem solvers."
     -- Damon Lindelof, interview on Inside Pulse
                                            
WQ

                                            
Mark
I think Jack Nicholson explained it all in "As good as it gets".

The motto of the "fairer" sex.
                                            
Default
Usage note from Merriam-Webster:

The one-word spelling alright appeared some 75 years after all right
itself had reappeared from a 400-year-long absence. Since the early
20th century some critics have insisted alright is wrong, but it has
its defenders and its users. It is less frequent than all right but
remains in common use especially in journalistic and business
publications. It is quite common in fictional dialogue, and is used
occasionally in other writing <the first two years of medical school
were alright -- Gertrude Stein>.

American Heritage is less forgiving:

Usage Note: Despite the appearance of the form alright in works of such
well-known writers as Langston Hughes and James Joyce, the single word
spelling has never been accepted as standard. This is peculiar, since
similar fusions such as already and altogether have never raised any
objections. The difference may lie in the fact that already and
altogether became single words back in the Middle Ages, whereas alright
has only been around for a little more than a century and was called
out by language critics as a misspelling. Consequently, one who uses
alright, especially in formal writing, runs the risk that readers may
view it as an error or as the willful breaking of convention.




Brian
                                            
Goro
yes.  Since all the guys are surfin the internet or playing X360, it's
probably not such a bad move.  Hell, any guys still watching teevee
probably LIKE those chick shows... :)

*shrug* i donut no.  I haven't watched a first-run tv show in....
forever.

-goro-
                                            
weathermansaysyahoocom
Men have turned away from TV. Whether this is a response to the
programming or the programming has driven men away is a question.  Part
of this may be that women have more discretionary income and are more
appealing to advertisers, whose commercials always seem to mock men,
probably turning them away from the TV, etc...

In fact, society at large has become women's culture, with campaigns
for breats cancer, Good Morning America's female music series, etc.
One reason for this is that when women get in charge, they tend to make
everything female-oriented. And while they may be "going where the
money is" in the short term, cutting out half their potential audience
isn't good in the long term, which is why network audiences are in fast
decline.

Why does it not surprise me that it would be a woman who is the first
to say "go where the money is?"
                                            
neon_06hotmailcom
It's not about the fact that they have female centered shows. It's the
fact that they are having too much of one thing. I've been an ABC
viewer for years. While I love "Grey's Anatomy" "Housewives" "Ugly
Betty" I'm finding that it's getting to be a bit too much with shows
like "Six Degrees" it would be nice to have some more male skewed
programming such as a spy thriller like "Alias". I just think they have
too much of one thing and the network is turning to be a bit more
boring. I acknowledge that they have "Lost" and "The Nine" but it would
be nice to have a couple more male intriguing shows, before they lose
all the male viewers.
                                            
WQ

                                            
David
They are aware of it. They made a conscious decision last year to
start aiming for female audiences and it's working well for them so
far.