Mrs. Rastahomie watches Little House on the Prairie every morning on TBS (don’t ask). Yesterday (Wednesday) she was agahst to find that the episode being aired was from considerably later in the series than Tuesday’s episode. The characters had aged considerably, whole new plot lines were taking place, etc. This brings me to my question:
Yesterday’s LHOTP fiasco notwithstanding, if I buy the rights to reruns of a syndicated show (say, I buy the rights to Friends from Warner Brothers), do I have any contractual obligation to air the shows in the order in which they originally aired? IOW, do syndication contracts these days make any requirements as to how the episodes are aired? Or could I just broadcast my favorite episode (the one where Ross is trying to get everybody to the museum benefit in time. hee hee hee ) over and over again, day after day?
And while we’re on the subject of LHOTP, did Melissa Gilbert have braces while they were producing that show? I swear there’s something weird about Laura’s teeth in that show, but for the life of me I can pin it down.
I doubt it. But most networks do, as running episodes chronologically would be more apt to drawing in both new viewers, and fans who really like a particular plot line.
a great example of synidcation is the Law & Order series on A & E. they have showings at least 3 times daily, and you can easily tell the season given the lead actors (they’ve had multiple changes of personnel). the only time the make a point of showing them in order is the rare two parter.
In addition, A & E have done “theme days”, where say on Labor Day, will show episodes all day that have some recurring theme, from multiple seasons. They’d even some times pick up a thread from a prior season’s show and have yet another crime with some of the same participants. (like the two episodes where the comedy club owner. First he was accused of having his wife murdered, found innocent, but evidence located afterward connected him with the shooter, and in the second episode, his new wife was also found murdered…)
No, you are not obligated to air the show in any particular order. The only thing you are obligated to broadcast, is any commercial sponsorship package that comes along with the program.
There are several reasons for this. First, many shows are released in groups (Friends is a current example) so that the first group may include shows from the first 3 seasons, the second group from the next 2 seasons, etc. Obviously, as soon as you get a new group, you’re going to start running it, which is one way to throw the other episodes out of sequence.
Second, many stations run their syndicated shows two or even three times a day. They may decide that the 4:00 show will come from a different season than the 6:00 show, or they may just run episode 31 at 4:00 and episode 32 at 6:00.
Third, since many of these syndicated shows are pre-empted from time to time in favor of sports, specials, infomercials, etc., it’s impossible for a syndicator to demand that a specific episode run at a specific time.
And finally, the station may just have sloppy record keeping, the print of a particular episode may be damaged so they need a replacement, etc.
I was wondering the same thing because of friends. Last week they skipped a few and showed the whole Ross/Emily wedding thing, then went back on monday and showed when they met, then went onto a show halfway through the next season. It boggles the mind. I thought about writing them and asking, but decided against it. I don’t think there’s any reasoning behind it.
Star Trek: Voyager has been in syndication for about a year now and the stations I’ve seen it on play it in order. However, the 6th season has just become available to them and they have jumped from the middle of the third season right into the 6th. F/X shows MASH* in approximate order.
The Simpsons are almost never shown in order. They often will do a special theme week and show all the Treehouse of Horror episodes. This probably happened last week. They often do a Sideshow Bob week as well.
On the other hand, do not overlook the power of inertia. If a local TV station manager gets a box with 26 video tapes labelled “Friends, episodes #1-26,” there’s a pretty good hance he/she’s gonna show them in order. It’s easier that way, less thinking involved, record-keeping is cleaner.
I sometimes travel for business, and I have found that often a syndicated series I am watching at home in Chicago is at the exact same spot in the series when I see it on the road. I chalk it up to inertia. All hail, most powerful and mighty of human forces!
I think that shows can by syndicated with fewer than 100 episodes, but they just aren’t very profitable. USA reruns a whole bunch of failed NBC sitcoms that never made it to 100 episodes.
After seeing them, I can see why this is the case.
the thing with 100 shows is just a general rule. why? 100 episodes / 5 days a week = 20 weeks. double that, for repeats when yer done with the first airing, and you have 40 weeks, almost a whole year. the remaining 12 weeks you can air favorite episodes.
if a show has reached 100 episodes (around 4 or 5 years) it usually means it has been a popular show that people will watch in reruns. anything less than that and you risk having people not tune in.
Well, on some channels they show two shows, back to back. Like Friends at seven and seven thirty. These shows are NEVER consecutive. EVER. The seven o’clock show might about Emily/Ross fiasco, and the seven thirty show is about Ross/Rachel fiasco.
–You’re looking at a rule of thumb. A show can be syndicated depending on it’s contract agreement.
An old rule was: 5 years = profitable syndication.
A few years ago one of the cable channels reran old shows of “Hondo” on Sunday mornings. The program with it’s rough hero and his dog sidekick actually developed a small cult following. The problem was the old ABC series only ran a half a season and there were something like 14 shows.
Cult or no cult 14 episodes can get old fast, although “The Honeymooners” sure lasted a long time with only 39 (the “lost episodes” appeared 30 years later).
While adam yax is correct that The Simpsons is not shown in chronological order in syndication, there was an established syndication schedule that most stations carrying the show follow. According to the upcoming episodes section of the Simpsons Archive:
I never really understood the dparticulars of the “barter”-type syndication arrangement vs. the common syndication deal where the local station has the discretion to run whatever episode they want. But until recently, there was an established syndication schedule for stations running Simpsons reruns.
Huh? That’s one I can’t follow, at least in the morning ones. Maybe the afternoon showings are more coherant. In the morning they’ll have a Blake/Trapper/Burns episode, then follow it with a Potter/BJ/Winchester episode. Then the next day they might show a Potter/BJ/Burns one. The weirdest had to be over Memorial Day when they showed the movie with Donald Sutherland and Elliot Gould followed by the last TV episode.
I never seem to see any of the “transition” episodes where someone leaves. What were the circumstances of Burns departure?
I believe F/X shows MAS*H is appropriate order for the time slow. If episode 31 is on at 9:00 and episode 73 is on at 9:30, the next day episode 32 will be on at 9:00 and episode 74 will be on at 9:30 and so forth.
In my opinion, F/X should just become a 24 hour MAS(H network. They’re close enough as it is and it was a grat show.
Anyway, as I remember it from long long ago, Frank Burns was written out by the Army, in its infinite wisdom, giving him a promotion and rotating him back Stateside. I remember Hawkeye, BJ, and Col. Potter standing around Potter’s desk toasting the news, with Hawkeye solemnly intoning, “Goodbye, Ferret Face”. BJ then caught his eye and the two broke up and laughed and scooped up all the papers off the desk and threw them in the air, while Potter beamed.
) over and over again, day after day?