How long til they're gone?

[cobbles]

How long do people think we have left before soap operas are pulled from the schedules by TV channels wanting a change of pace or bitten by the death of linear TV. The days of 20m viewers for Corrie and EastEnders are long long gone - even Corries 50th anniversary sub 15m viewers.

Hollyoaks seems the most obvious candidate for culling, pushed up against the BBC regional and ITV national news its never been one to rake in massive ratings, but right now its sub 500k rather comfortably. Presumably even double billing Simpsons repeats could seem appealing to any future Channel 4 bosses wanting a big shake up.

EastEnders is next - just 3.35m overnight for Mondays return must be sending alarm bells ringing at the top of the BBC heirachy. What was once a guaranteed ratings puller now regular smashed to oblivion by the news. The show has been directionless since it's 25th anniversary and has had far too many drivers since. It's a miracle the BBC haven't canned it already and took a break from soap operas.

Then there's Emmerdale whi h seems to have found a reasonable flat-lining number of viewers but how long can that last in it's current messy state. The heady days of Robrun and other storylines that grabbed headlines a few years ago gone to the abyss. You'd imagine regardless of ratings if ITV had to cut a soap or wanted to Ed would go first.

Lastly there's Corrie but even it's high viewing figures compared to its rivals are fractions of the figures it managed to pull in its hey day. Could another run of storylines like the Blackburn era be the final nail it's coffin. Could the loss of the final legacy characters over the next decade cause issues.

What do we think happens when they are pulled presumably either resurrected on a streaming platform or truly dead?

I don't set out to be pessimistic but I struggle to see the genre lasting to 2030

 

[ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989]

I agree that Hollyoaks could be the first to go, it’s never been in the same league as the big three, even in the 1990s it was the poor relation to Brookside, had Brookside not been axed in the early 2000s then Hollyoaks probably would have been binned off years ago, it only seem to become popular and the show we know it as today from the mid 2000s onwards after Brookside was gone, I think will carry on and make its 30th anniversary in 2025 but after that who knows.

As for EastEnders, again you’re right in the fact that EE has been without direction for a long time and I would say that it lost that long before it’s 25th anniversary, the rot was beginning show around 2006/2007 and it’s been a long, slow and painful decline from there, but I don’t think it will be axed anytime soon, it’ll probably be retooled and rebooted in some way

Emmerdale has been up and down since the mid 2000s, they hit the nail on the head when they introduced the Wylde, Barton and White families in the early 2010s, but these families were either Burned out quickly or reduced in size due to departures of cast members which can’t be helped, Emmerdale I think needs another massive shake up, go back to its roots while embracing the future and write out half the cast and introduce new families, that properly reflect a true Yorkshire village, I feel that a lot of the new characters are too urban/townie, and a lot of the recent storylines have just been boring, the Belle/Jamie/Andrea love triangle, the Belle/Jamie relationship seems to be a Diet Coke version of the Joe/Debbie relationship, The Malone storyline isn't interesting enough, and I find the fact that Harriet has spent half a year avoiding Will, her stalker and is now in a relationship with him is just beyond unreal, however I think if Emmerdale cleared house and did a massive revamp and relaunch it will still be on the air by 2032 - it’s 60th anniversary

As for Corrie, it’s had it’s ups and downs and swings and roundabouts and it’s survived it all, Corrie is too much of a National institution at this point for ITV to ever axe it, ironically it being the oldest of the soaps might well be the factor of it lasting beyond 2030, ITV would sooner him Emmerdale than axe Corrie

 

[cobbles]

I agree that Hollyoaks could be the first to go, it’s never been in the same league as the big three, even in the 1990s it was the poor relation to Brookside, had Brookside not been axed in the early 2000s then Hollyoaks probably would have been binned off years ago, it only seem to become popular and the show we know it as today from the mid 2000s onwards after Brookside was gone, I think will carry on and make its 30th anniversary in 2025 but after that who knows.

As someone who wasn't old enough to watch telly or know much about what I was watching when Brookside was on I can't comprehend the thought process that led to HO being kept over Brookside. I just can't. Hollyoaks has it's benefits in being unashamedly trashy and OTT - but it almost seems like that niche has outlived it's usefulness with the advent of trash reality like TOWIE and Made in Chelsea. You could have seen Brookside remain steady and continue to tread the line between social realism and sensationalist lunacy pretty well had it been given a bit more backing.

As for EastEnders, again you’re right in the fact that EE has been without direction for a long time and I would say that it lost that long before it’s 25th anniversary, the rot was beginning show around 2006/2007 and it’s been a long, slow and painful decline from there, but I don’t think it will be axed anytime soon, it’ll probably be retooled and rebooted in some way

It just seems to have ran out of steam to be frank, I fell out of love with it years ago. The areas it represents no longer exist, and neither the acting or the plots are strong enough for you to be absorbed in the fantasy world of it in the same way Corrie lets you nowadays. It's also treat the exits of it's long term characters appallingly - see Dot, Pat and Peggy.

As for Corrie, it’s had it’s ups and downs and swings and roundabouts and it’s survived it all, Corrie is too much of a National institution at this point for ITV to ever axe it, ironically it being the oldest of the soaps might well be the factor of it lasting beyond 2030, ITV would sooner him Emmerdale than axe Corrie

Yup Corrie seems to the sacred cow of the ITV soaps. Surely the last to go, I do wonder if a 6 episode a week schedule could destroy viewing figures that have been incredibly health recently. I really think cutting down to 3 a week long term would help Corrie retain viewers - it's a far more manageable number of episodes to consume and that's been reflected in an uptick in viewers - it's too early to say but I imagine a ratings decline is inevitable.

 

[Rove]

It appears the soap genre in general is in decline as I'm hearing the numbers for American soaps since their return post Covid-19 are also soft. I would have thought with many people self-isolating or working from home the numbers would be up. So what's causing this? Is there a general feeling viewers just don't care anymore? Perhaps the pseudo reality nonsense where viewers have been seduced into thinking it's all real is hurting scripted television like EastEnders, Coronation Street and others.

The other issue squeezing scripted television is $$$. Producing a series like Corrie and EastEnders cannot be cheap per episode unlike reality nonsense where 30 year old, ducked lipped, Botox injected, breast enhancement, seeking my 15 minutes of fame women fighting over a 30 year old gym junkie, appropriate tattoo placement with not a hair on my male physique Ken Doll has the generations eyeballs today. Numbers here in Australia would suggest this.

I think the genre of soap can survive especially in the case of Corrie and EastEnders as they are now regarded as legacy series. They have history for the writers and producers to work their magic. Those same writers though need to create characters I feel real empathy towards with a touch of realism. A case in point is the return of The Bold and The Beautiful. I know probably not the ideal series to be mentioning here but as I haven't seen EastEnders or Corrie for many years I'll use B&B as an example. Watching an episode post Covid-19 and the writers have decided not to mention it. I think that's a bad move. Like many I enjoy escapism television but to completely ignore a global pandemic treats the viewer like idiots. Soaps are meant to represent a heightened version of our owning boring lives but to carry on as if Covid-19 doesn't exist at all well.....B&B may as well be about a family existing on Mars.

I believe within a few years some of these series will be culled. They are just too expansive to produce with fewer eyeballs watching.

 

[J. R.'s Piece]

Hollyoaks is one of Channel 4’s most popular programmes. It won several awards last year, including Best Soap at the British Soap Awards 2019 and Best Soap at the Inside Soap Awards 2019. Hollyoaks Later in January 2020 had viewing figures of 1.1 million. In 2018, it won the Broadcast Award for Best Soap/Continuing Drama. Gregory Finnegan has won Best Actor awards for his portrayal of James Nightingale. The current executive producer, Bryan Kirkwood, is leaving at the end of the year but his episodes will be airing up to June 2021.

New episodes of Hollyoaks air as first look episodes on E4, the weekday before the Channel 4 broadcasts. There are repeats on E4 plus omnibus screenings on E4 and Channel 4. A one-off exception being this Monday, to set the new schedule in place. The show is now filming 25th anniversary storylines. Channel 4 announced last year that it is committed to doing Hollyoaks for years. It won a Mind Media Award for Scott Drinkwell’s suicide story. Lime Pictures have initiatives to nurture new talent. It isn’t going away soon.

 

[cobbles]

I think the genre of soap can survive especially in the case of Corrie and EastEnders as they are now regarded as legacy series. They have history for the writers and producers to work their magic. Those same writers though need to create characters I feel real empathy towards with a touch of realism. A case in point is the return of The Bold and The Beautiful. I know probably not the ideal series to be mentioning here but as I haven't seen EastEnders or Corrie for many years I'll use B&B as an example. Watching an episode post Covid-19 and the writers have decided not to mention it. I think that's a bad move. Like many I enjoy escapism television but to completely ignore a global pandemic treats the viewer like idiots. Soaps are meant to represent a heightened version of our owning boring lives but to carry on as if Covid-19 doesn't exist at all well.....B&B may as well be about a family existing on Mars.

I can understand the American soaps ignoring Covid far more than I can understand any UK ones doing - at the end of the day they are set on a different planet even in normal times and make few pretensions not to be...

UK soaps are set in the real world and try to remind us of that at every opportunity often to their detriment. So they have to acknowledge Covid.

Most shows have done a decent job with acknowledging it.

 

[emm1978]

No soap should face the axe just because they look different to what they did 20 years ago, or whatever. Nothing is going to stay the same forever... Things change and move on, so why shouldn't soaps?

I don't keep up with Hollyoaks, I used to keep up with EastEnders but I don't follow it anymore, but I wouldn't call for it to be axed. Other people watch them and enjoy them so I wouldn't want to jeopardise that.

Coronation Street & Emmerdale are the two I watch religiously. Emmerdale is constantly picked on for not being the same now as it was in the 70s or whatever. They dropped 4 letters from the show's title... Big deal! Why waste time worrying about just one word?

 

[Ome]

I can't think of any reason why they would cancel any of the soaps

The days of 20m viewers for Corrie and EastEnders are long long gone - even Corries 50th anniversary sub 15m viewers.

But we all know why that is.


When these shows were getting that many viewers, there wasn't the choice back then, the viewers have today.



I never understand how the viewer rating system works in this country and how it's based on 5000 homes. Then I'm not sure if it includes viewers who record the show and watch it later. I don't think I have watched a live episode of Corrie since 2000.

 

[cobbles]

I can't think of any reason why they would cancel any of the soaps




But we all know why that is.


When these shows were getting that many viewers, there wasn't the choice back then, the viewers have today.



I never understand how the viewer rating system works in this country and how it's based on 5000 homes. Then I'm not sure if it includes viewers who record the show and watch it later. I don't think I have watched a live episode of Corrie since 2000.

BARB is used for live data from telly watchers who agree to have what their watching monitored.

The iplayer/itvplayer etc things provided the +7 and +28 figures based on streams of the show on their websites.

 

[Ome]

BARB is used for live data from telly watchers who agree to have what their watching monitored.

But why only pick a handful of people to represent the whole country? This is why I don't get it with ratings and stuff like that.

 

[Ome]

The iplayer/itvplayer etc things provided the +7 and +28 figures based on streams of the show on their websites.

I forgot to ask, but what about SKY recordings, are they monitored?

 

[cobbles]

I forgot to ask, but what about SKY recordings, are they monitored?

Depends how it was watched how it's classified but it's counted

Frequently asked questions Barb

www.barb.co.uk

Yes, non-live viewing from PVRs like Sky+ and other recording devices such as DVDRs are measured and included in the viewing figures as timeshift viewing. If a programme has been viewed on the same day as the original broadcast the viewing will be included in the overnight files as VOSDAL data. Otherwise, if it has been viewed in the 7 days after the original broadcast it will be included in the consolidated data.

There's loads of info on their site about how they do it....

What is Barb and how do we measure total viewing? Barb

www.barb.co.uk

 

[Barbara Fan]

I only watch(ed) Corrie and i feel that the standard of acting (Chesney, Gemma, Maria, Sean, Fiz et al)was not what it used to be when i really enjoyed it and it was unmissable- and same can be said for the writing - Corrie has lost its way from good old drama, northern wit, humour, pathos and relies on unrealstic plots and scenes and not one wedding, christening, funeral is ever "normal" and is so far fetched and unbelievable. Also how can they afford it all as half of them must be on a minimum wage, but are in a new outfit every scene!

I will dip into it from time to time - during lock down but generally for every great Roy, David, Gail Platt, Rita, Ken, Sally, Kevin and Carla there is a whole bunch of characters i had to fwd.

I also dont know anyone who
A - Watches Eastenders
B- Missed it
C- Wanted it back

Most of the patients in hospital like Corrie and Emmerdale as the 2 soaps to watch, the huge ratings days are long gone and there is far more choice - I think Corrie will have probs when the stalwarts are no longer there, the link to the past - Ken, Rita, Gail and co as many of the younger cast cant act very well and i cant understand the appeal of Gemma and Chesney at all, she is dreadful and will never be a classic Corrie character, but Carla is and they should do everything to keep her.

 

[cobbles]

Most of the patients in hospital like Corrie and Emmerdale as the 2 soaps to watch, the huge ratings days are long gone and there is far more choice - I think Corrie will have probs when the stalwarts are no longer there, the link to the past - Ken, Rita, Gail and co as many of the younger cast cant act very well and i cant understand the appeal of Gemma and Chesney at all, she is dreadful and will never be a classic Corrie character, but Carla is and they should do everything to keep her.

I actually think Corrie surprisingly the strongest in this regard.....

Ken and Rita, Audrey will be the oldies until their replaced by
Gail who will be the resident oldies until
Sally and Kevin replace them until
Peter, Tracy, Nick and Leanne, Carla or any combination take them over at which point you've got potential with
David and Sarah and perhaps others of that era who become fixtures.
Then the current generation. (Daniel to me seems a good shout for a never leaving character.

Once those links to the past go, so will the people whose link to the past they are in 15 years time the link to the past will be Gail if she's still in it (Helen Worth would be 84 years old) and the likes of Sally and Kevin (Sally Dyvenor would be 72 and Michael le Vell would be 70)

Those characters would then sort of assume the role that Ken and Rita fill over time. That's one of the ways Corrie's managed to survive so far and they'll keep it going - the legends of the past become floater characters in the background but their never written out unless they want to be. If you were unkind you could call it a 'living part of the furniture' technique but it works wonders.

 

[Carrie Fairchild]

This conversation pops up every few years but in reality, there hasn't been any major shakeups to the UK soap landscape since Brookside got the chop nearly 17 years ago (I know that The Bill was axed after this in 2010 but it kind of straddled the line between cop show and soap and the 2005 demise of Family Affairs wasn't seen a huge deal because it was never held in the same regard as the Big Three by viewers). Viewers have settled into a routine with the five soaps that are left and as long as they continue to rate well in their timeslots, be it daytime (Doctors), teatime / E4 airings (Hollyoaks) and primetime (Corrie, Emmerdale and EastEnders) there's no reason why they'd pull them from the schedules. In addition to this, BBC and ITV have both invested heavily in the new sets for EE (£87m) and Corrie in recent years, so for that reason alone they're unlikely to dump them anytime soon. Also, Hollyoaks is always the one mentioned as being likely to be the first to go in these conversations but as @J. R.'s Piece pointed out, the show is doing quite well in the little niche it has carved out for itself and pulls in ratings for E4. At a push, it could transition full time from Channel 4 to E4 (like Neighbours moving from Channel 10 to it's digital sister channel) at a later stage but I can't see it being axed anytime soon. While we might argue that the quality isn't what it was, as long as they're pulling in the numbers, they'll remain on air.

 

[Carrie Fairchild]

As someone who wasn't old enough to watch telly or know much about what I was watching when Brookside was on I can't comprehend the thought process that led to HO being kept over Brookside. I just can't. Hollyoaks has it's benefits in being unashamedly trashy and OTT - but it almost seems like that niche has outlived it's usefulness with the advent of trash reality like TOWIE and Made in Chelsea. You could have seen Brookside remain steady and continue to tread the line between social realism and sensationalist lunacy pretty well had it been given a bit more backing.

It was never a case of one being kept over the other. Hollyoaks was doing quite well in it's own regard in the period when Brookside was on the way out. HO aired 4 episodes a week at that point and all episodes rated in the Top 20 or 30 shows on Channel 4 each week whereas Brookside had sank without a trace by then because Channel 4 had shoved it off to a graveyard omnibus slot on Saturday afternoons (followed by a move to a late night slot for it's final months). I think the main causes of Brookside's demise was panic caused by dwindling ratings in the latter part of the 90's, Channel 4 refocusing it's primetime schedule in the 00's on lifestyle and reality shows (which led to them moving Brookside out of primetime to free up slots) and to an extent, creator Phil Redmond's open criticism of Channel 4 bosses, which I imagine didn't do him any favours when he was trying to keep the show on air.

 

[Julia's Gun]

Sorry guys but Hollyoaks has been on its last legs for years. It has to go soon, and hopefully a new soap fit for the 2020s and our very changed times can launch soon....

 

[Ome]

Sorry guys but Hollyoaks has been on its last legs for years.

What do you mean by 'last legs'? I haven't watched it in a while, but every time I do catch it, it always feels relevant looks very much as it always does.

It has to go soon, and hopefully a new soap fit for the 2020s

Do you not think this would be a massive gamble?

Hollyoaks is well and truly established, it's coming up to its 25th anniversary and has a great fanbase (it wins awards based on its fanbase) so one would be taking a gamble that those fans would be happy with a replacement.

 

[Julia's Gun]

Yes it would be a gamble and I may be wrong, it's just my humble opinion. I have watched it on and off over the years since 2001 or so with Gary Lucy's rape storyline. Bringing back all these old characters just seems a bit desparate and tragic, as with Eastenders. It's probably just that i've got older and moved further away from the audience demographic, but the last few years on Hollyoaks remind me of the last period of Brookside before its demise. There are only so many serial killers and explosions you can have before it all gets too silly to care anymore.

Just to switch channels for a moment, although a new soap would be a big gamble, Eastenders could certainly do with being closing down and replaced by another London-based soap spread out more across the city. You could keep a few key characters and then have some based in South London, say Clapham, someone rich who moved into a pad on the Thames, and then a few relics left in East End. Get rid of the square and its set and just move between some new designer sets dotted around the city, with the old bit of location shooting for authenticity. I'd certainly watch, the Queen VIc is totally redundant these days.

Not sure this plan would work quite so well in a city like Chester!

 

[cobbles]

But why only pick a handful of people to represent the whole country? This is why I don't get it with ratings and stuff like that.

I missed this one the other day. The short answer is practicalities - same as any of survey method. Surveying say 5,000 folk who are demographically selected to match population is accurate enough without surveying millions