XPost: rec.arts.drwho, rec.arts.sf.tv
From: YourName@YourISP.com
On 2025-02-08 19:13:04 +0000, Blueshirt said:
> The Doctor wrote:
>> In article ,
>> Blueshirt wrote:
>>> Your Name wrote:
>>>>
>>>> A complete NON-surprise that the ratings are lower than the
>>>> pre-Disney seasons. Disney of course bought into Doctor Who
>>>> because they stupidly believed it would raise their number
>>>> of subscribers, which it wasn't ever going to do and
>>>> anybody with more than one braincell could have told them
>>>> the 'ratings' would drop dramatically. The only legal way
>>>> for international viewers to watch "Doctor Who" currently
>>>> is to subscribe to Disney+, which most people simply
>>>> weren't going to bother doing, especially for just one show
>>>> and continual prices rises (both for Disney+ and general
>>>> retail prices for everything).
>>>
>>> I don't think the directors of these streaming services live
>>> in the real world. I would never have thought anyone around
>>> the world would subscribe to Disney+ JUST for "Doctor
>>> Who"... it's not that kind of essential show. Maybe when the
>>> Tenth Doctor and Rose/Martha were around it might have
>>> happened to some degree, as that was a popular time for the
>>> show. But Disney were being delusional if they thought in
>>> 2023 that "Doctor Who" would be the show to hook the masses
>>> in to their shiny new streaming service.
>>>
>>> Now, I did think "Doctor Who" post 2023 would be more popular
>>> than it has been... but even as a fan, and had I needed to, I
>>> still wouldn't have subscribed to Disney+ just to watch
>>> "Doctor Who" at the prices they are charging.
>>>
>>>> Subscription-based streaming services themselves weren't
>>>> really a good idea to begin with, let alone numerous
>>>> services all with their own 'exclusive' content. The old
>>>> cable and satelitte TV services have been struggling for
>>>> decades to retain and grow subscriber numbers.
>>>
>>> There is a use for streaming services but I doubt anyone
>>> subscribes to any of them for just one show. When they were a
>>> bit cheaper, and during covid, they played their part in
>>> entertaining us, but now with the continual price rises, and
>>> adverts, people will be more choosy in which ones they
>>> subscribe to. So whenever I see reports that subscriber
>>> numbers are down on ______ service I just think, "What did
>>> you expect?"
>>>
>>> Nobody can subscribe to everything so somebody is going to
>>> suffer.
>>
>> DW is suffering beacuse of an antiDisney sentiment.
>
> "Doctor Who" was suffering before Disney came along, if that's
> the word you want to use to describe fandom unhappiness and poor
> ratings. Disney had nothing to do with the 13th Doctor's era,
> which was over before they came along. Plus, the ratings that
> the show has been getting in the UK (BBC1/iPlayer) since the
> 15th Doctor arrived on the scene have nothing whatsoever to do
> with Disney either, as "Doctor Who" is not on Disney+ in the UK
> & Ireland. So maybe you need to start seeing the bigger picture.
You can at least partly thank the blantant Politically Correctness
idiocy to appease BBC quota box ticking for that. I know of quite a few
people who used to be big fans of Doctor Who, but the stupidity of
gender and ethnicity swapping characaters meant none of them watched
when it was still on free broadcast TV, let alone when it required a
Disney+ subscription.
The Disney+ shift has simply added more nails in the coffin lid for
international viewers. I wouldn't be surprised if international DVD
sales figures have risen *slightly* since that happened, and of course
DVD sales likely don't count in the almighty "ratings". (The numbers
watching via the nuaghty web have likely also risen slightly, but then
there's no measure of that.)
--- SoupGate-DOS v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
