I understand that a procedural's "crime of the week" setup involves sacrificing major character subplots [...] So if CM is thinking about playing it straight to preserve the vast majority of their squickable (non-fannish) viewers, then I'd rather they not open a controversial issue and then ignore it or make it magically go away.
It's not the "crime of the week" setup that's the problem. It's the bottom line that's the issue.
A procedural (which focuses on the work) and a drama (which focuses on the character's personal lives) attract very different audiences. Sometimes shows can jump demographics and stay popular. Often, though, when a show tries to jump demographics it finds that the audience it's aiming for won't try it and the audience it had now doesn't want it, and the show bombs out. When shows bomb networks lose money and network execs know that. They also know that if a show gets too controversial or edgy, companies won't want their commercials on during the show for fear that the Moral Guardians will boycott them or that people will associate their product with controversy and edge. That lowers ad impressions for the show and costs the network money. Networks care about making money more than anything.
All of which I'm certain you know, of course.
That being said, I think the CM PTBs deserves a break because no matter how thoughtful and realistic they wish to be, they have to answer to execs who see only the bottom line -- and we the audience have no way of knowing how much of what we see is the writers or the network. All it takes is one exec to say "no one would ever take the commander seriously if you go on and on about his abused childhood" (no matter how wrong that may be) and there goes that plotline. In the case of male rape, touch-and-go implication literally may be the best handling of the situation that is within the writing staff's power.
Foyet's scene is getting people thinking and talking about male rape which, IMO, is at least a step in the right direction.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
no subject
Date: Sep. 26th, 2009 06:12 am (UTC)It's not the "crime of the week" setup that's the problem. It's the bottom line that's the issue.
A procedural (which focuses on the work) and a drama (which focuses on the character's personal lives) attract very different audiences. Sometimes shows can jump demographics and stay popular. Often, though, when a show tries to jump demographics it finds that the audience it's aiming for won't try it and the audience it had now doesn't want it, and the show bombs out. When shows bomb networks lose money and network execs know that. They also know that if a show gets too controversial or edgy, companies won't want their commercials on during the show for fear that the Moral Guardians will boycott them or that people will associate their product with controversy and edge. That lowers ad impressions for the show and costs the network money. Networks care about making money more than anything.
All of which I'm certain you know, of course.
That being said, I think the CM PTBs deserves a break because no matter how thoughtful and realistic they wish to be, they have to answer to execs who see only the bottom line -- and we the audience have no way of knowing how much of what we see is the writers or the network. All it takes is one exec to say "no one would ever take the commander seriously if you go on and on about his abused childhood" (no matter how wrong that may be) and there goes that plotline. In the case of male rape, touch-and-go implication literally may be the best handling of the situation that is within the writing staff's power.
Foyet's scene is getting people thinking and talking about male rape which, IMO, is at least a step in the right direction.
DragonLady