Don't get too worked up, they're not dumping all reruns. But TV Land announced that by the end of 2009 they are looking to have original programming fill up half of their prime-time lineup. Last year it was 4% and it's only 15% now. The Wall Street Journal article goes on and on about how the channel is aiming to skew younger, to generate more ad revenue. When it spun off solo in 1996, TV on DVD was still relatively new, so it was a lot of fun to have a place to go to get your nostalgia fix. But now, most folks can go to their DVD library if they want to see M*A*S*H again.It goes on to say that the types of shows they're developing are romance and dating shows, like Cougar, which is basically The Bachelorette with an older woman scouting younger guys. The strides they've made so far have improved their ratings and median age, so I guess this will work, too but it's disappointing to me. Basic cable used to have channels where you knew what to expect when you went there and TV Land was one of them.
They've also said that they're looking to import newer shows to rerun like Friends and other more recent shows. Oh and since everyone else is doing it, they're developing their own scripted sitcom, too. Essentially, everything that made TV Land unique and special in the landscape of television is not worth it any more. Their average audience member is 55 and those people just aren't the kind of people you want watching your network, apparently. It almost seems like an integrity issue to me. Why go to the trouble of developing a brand and an identity that's unique if you're willing to drop it all by the wayside for a quick buck?
Now it's going to become just like all the rest of those networks that have lost their brand identity in search of the almighty advertisement dollar. Eventually, those network names will be completely meaningless, just like MTV and VH1 have already become. We already have AMC losing its meaning as its hardly all about American Movie Classics anymore. Sci Fi has wrestling and Cartoon Network has live action programming. At least TNN (The Nashville Network) had the decency to change their name to Spike to reflect their new more generalized approach.
So what do you think of this news? Is there any place left for a network focusing on rerunning classic television? Is there any place left for niche channels at all or will they all follow suit eventually?















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
9-02-2008 @ 10:32AM
JD said...
It's hard to get behind a network; TV Land, Nick and Nick at Nite, when they make decisions worth than rats an crack. When Nick started it was the place to go for TV you knew and trusted, then that followed over to TV Land.
They want younger viewers, ones that have the worst attention spans of any generation to date. They come up with a show where a Cougar picks a younger guy. Do they really think younger viewers are going to watch, NO. They older crowd will watch to get off on what the Cougar is doing.
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 10:46AM
Cyantre said...
I miss the days where at a certain time Nick became Nick at Nite. It introduced classic shows to a younger audience such as "I Love Lucy, "I Dream of Jeannie", and "Bewitched" to name a few. These days children aren't exposed to anything of the sort, instead they get the same old garbage over and over again, reguardless of the channel.
I remember when they took the Suzanne Vega song Tom's Diner and made a version to promote "I Dream of Jeannie". That caught the attention of the younger audience without having to go to such extremes.
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 11:00AM
Raychel said...
I remember that "I Dream of Jeannie" ad! I know that version better than I do the actual song...
It's a shame that TV Land is changing. I was actually a little sad when Nick at Nite was spun off to it's own channel because it wasn't going to be on regular cable (this at a time when satellite was the only way to get extra channels; digital cable wasn't introduced just yet). I grew up watching The Monkees and F Troop on Nick at Nite. I was super jazzed when they had their 10 year anniversary and they showed one episode of every show they ever aired. I got to see the Steve McQueen episode of Alfred Hitchcock!
Anywho, this new change sucks the most.
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 11:15AM
JW said...
I miss the old TV Land and Nick at Nite. I always watched I Love Lucy and The Jeffersons when they were on Nick at Nite. I was probably just 8 or 9 when they were on there. Just turning 21, I can't even tell you when either of those shows come on; if they even do anymore. I am tired of these reality shows, and doesn't all the networks air re runs of a lot of these shows now? TBS used to show Home Improvement and I finally got tired of it and it's on Nick (might as well not even call it Nick at Nite) and there's Fresh Prince who was on TBS and moved to Nick. I like Friends enough to watch it on TV Land, but I always forget about the cable network channels. I made an effort to watch Raising the Bar on TNT last night only because I knew who Mark-Paul Gosselaar was and grew up watching Saved by the Bell and NYPD Blue. They just need to keep one format and run with it, or just change the name of the channel if they are going to change the format.
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 11:53AM
miller980 said...
It's disappointing but it almost seems like they've been planning this for a while. When older shows used to join TVLand they made a big deal out it. Now it just seems like they shuffle the deck occasionally but for the most part there is no excitement with the channel whatsoever. I actually find myself watching Nick at Nite more than TVLand - despite far fewer different shows.
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 12:25PM
lucyfan62 said...
I used to watch TV Land all the time because I could see shows that weren't (at the time) avaialble to see in any other format. I'm sure the DVD landscape has changed TV Land, but there is still a wealth of programming out there not available on DVD or other formats. I used to stay up late on Friday nights and watch the old CBN network (yes, Christian Broadcasting!) because they would run THE JACK BENNY PROGRAM, THE BURNS & ALLEN SHOW, MY LITTLE MARGIE, BACHELOR FATHER, and THE LIFE OF RILEY. I'd never seen those shows before and I loved them - and I was 20 at the time - and TV Land, to the best of my knowledge, has never shown any of these series except for maybe Jack Benny. They've run I LOVE LUCY and THE LUCY SHOW, but what about HERE'S LUCY? The people running TV Land let it get stagnant by showing the same shows over and over again, and then acquiring shows readily available in syndication. There are a ton of shows I'd program the channel with to make it a destination for baby boomers and their kids to introduce them to what TV used to be like. As it stands, TV Land has lost a viewer...but at 46 I'm probably not the demographic they're looking for anymore. Farewell, Goodbye and Amen, TV Land.
Reply
10-01-2008 @ 7:01AM
suegbarnes said...
I TOTALLY AGREE. I THOUGHT IT WAS ONLY ME THAT
WAS GETTING SO DISAPPOINTED WITH TVLAND. I WAS
HOPING THAT THEY WOULD BRING IN MORE OLD SHOWS LIKE MY THREE SONS, FOR EXAMPLE, BUT THEY
BRING IN THIS CRAP.
I,M FINDING MYSELF WATCHING ANYTHING BUT TVLAND. THEY HAVE LOST ME TOO.
IT WAS GOOD WHILE IT LASTED.
WHY TRY TO FIX THINGS WHEN IT AIN'T BROKEN.
YOU ONLY MAKE IT WORSE.
9-03-2008 @ 6:12AM
Tony said...
...and how about Tech TV? The last time I bothered even checking the listings Leo and the guys were gone and they were showing "The Man Show".
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 2:23PM
Adrienne said...
I'm terribly disappointed, but I haven't watched TV Land in ages because of all their "young" content. I'm not 55. I won't be 55 for another 27 years. It seems like I should be in the prime demographic. Anyway, I loved watching tv shows from before I was born. I loved the simpler storylines, and honestly the history that came along with them. Again, it's disappointing, but I've already stopped watching both TV Land and Nick at Nite because they aren't any good any more.
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 2:49PM
MacGuffin said...
Wouldn't a retro television network inherently skew to an older demographic?
That's the reason why you watch TV Land in the first place: Oldies.
Who needs more "original programming"? Isn't that what NBC, CBS, ABC, et al supposed to do?
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 3:17PM
Mel said...
Just one more reason to get rid of cable. Not all young people want to watch "reality" shows or junk like Friends. I love the comedies of the 70s and 80s when I was a toddler/grade schooler, because THEY ARE ACTUALLY FUNNY, unlike the stuff they air today. It's a good thing some of the classics have been released on DVD or else I'd have absolutely nothing to watch.
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 3:44PM
A Fan said...
How about American Life TV? They show a bunch of old shows.
Reply
9-02-2008 @ 4:15PM
Nate said...
Not everyone gets AmericanLifeTV though, it's in about 20 million homes. We were going to get it on our cable system, but it got pushed aside in one of those annoying fights with public access channels (which most of the time shows that annoying Free Speech channel with shows made for $3.50).
I'm so sick of Viacom and their networks which don't seem to care about anything about ratings. I loved TV Land when it started, and now it's going down the tubes with this stupid obsession with getting older women to watch TV with modeling shows and "High School Reunion", a show no one was asking to come back.
Reply
9-03-2008 @ 10:54AM
patti8955 said...
I think TV Land should stick to what they have shown for
years:classic TV, that goes from the earliest days of TV,
in the 50's to the most recent of times. On one hand it's
OK for Friends to be part of that mix, but on the other
hand, shows like Extreme Makeover and Scrubs, those
are shows that are still on the air! They are cheapening
their product in selling out to the damn reality genre, but
I guess that it is just a sign of the times
.
Reply
9-04-2008 @ 12:36AM
David Wyler said...
I'm 54 yo, and have watched Nick at Nite and TV Land for many years. I watched them over any other channels, because I always like the programs they showed as well as it seemed the content was much better. Sure maybe the shows were vanilla and everything was sugar coated; always a happy ending. Maybe the shows were old and silly and not reality (at leaste in todays world), but it was refreshing and relaxing. Not like the shows of today, sex, profanity, killings, using drugs, disrespect ,etc., heck, I had enough of that in real life being a cop for 26 years. Why would I want to watch it on television too. I don't like the reality shows, or someones 10 or 20 year reunion (which was so fake) and I have always liked George Foreman but I hated his show (why would anyone air their family issues, which again was fake). TV Land will do anything for the money and now want a younger audience....so be it. I'm wathing TV Land less and less because of the changes. Now I hope their days are numbered since they couldn't be loyal to those who were loyal to them all these years. And what I really think of the gurus who made this decision I can't put in print.
Reply
9-04-2008 @ 9:28AM
April VanDusen said...
I totally agree with what I have read about TV Land so far. I, like many other viewers, don't understand why a "classic television station" (As they called themselves in the beginning) would want to change.
As one other person mentioned they are watching TV Land less and less, well, so am I. I am so disappointed in TV Land.
I used to put Nick at Nite and TV Land on for my grandchildren to watch. And guess what, they are 10, 6, and almost 2. They enjoyed it !!
Maybe the programs are sugar coated, but don't you think we all get enough reality in our every day lives?
I know I sure do!!
I'm sorry TV Land to see you change so much. I won't be watching any more. I have already begun to look for alternate programming.
Hey, did anyone know that WGN network runs classic programming on Sunday Nights? They have The Honeymooners, Newhart, WKRP in Cincinnati, and many more. And ION network is running Quantum Leap along with some other very interesting programs.
I'm afraid TV Land has lost a viewer, but I wonder if they even care.
Reply