News: Can of Worms takes a Huge Hit in Episode 4

Yesterday I wrote a post about how Ten crowbarring The Renovators into its schedule was anything but good news for its other new show Can of Worms.
And I take no pleasure in saying that I was unfortunately correct in my estimations. According to TV Tonight, Can of Worms rated a very, very average 591,000.
It isn't disastrous, obviously, but to lose over a third of its audience is horrible- and to think it was all Ten's doing.
Yes, they want to promote their new show The Renovators (which pulled a nice 978,000 in its second outing- showing it will likely be a slow, but steady burner a la MasterChef Season 1), but why do it at the expense of a fledgling yet promising show?
I can only hope that it doesn't sink any lower next week, when there will be a similar situation- it will be extraordinarily hard to claw its way back from a sub-500,000 number, which I fear is where it's heading.

Analysis: Can of Worms' Dangerous Bump to 9:50PM: Why Have Ten Thrown a Hammer In The Works?

Can of Worms premiered on Network Ten three weeks ago, and despite a luke-warm reception to its uneven premiere and its polarising nature, its ratings have been remarkably decent and more importantly, remarkably consistent.

Most of this is due to Ten's bold strategy of thrusting it into an imposing primetime slot- Monday 8:30, following MasterChef's strong rating elimination night.

It was no doubt given a leg-up in the ratings, helping it to reach the very respectable heights of 900 thousand plus viewers.

However, this week Ten seem to have thrown a spanner in the works, or should that be a hammer, with the second episode of Ten's shiny new reality format The Renovators snatching its old timeslot of 8:30.

This forces Can of Worms to move into a later slot. Before it has even aired, I can tell you it will lose some of its coveted audience. Automatically. This is just basic television ratings 101- move a show to a later timeslot, there will be less viewers. People start going to bed, is one reason why. Another is the obvious fact that it will confuse viewers, as well as frustrate them. One of the gripes of viewers with networks is the way shows are shoved around the schedule with little notice, or consideration for viewers.

And of course there are exceptions; quality shows with a large, devoted following will rate at 9:30.

Take Summer Heights High a few years ago; Chris Lilley had built a large following due to We Can Be Heroes, and they followed in him in droves to his new timeslot.

And normally if a show changed timeslot to 9:30 it wouldn't be the end of the world... But this is 9:50, not only an irregular time-slot to put into your mental viewing diary at less than a week's notice, but also will lead to a large drop-off at around 10:30, which will severely decrease its averaged out ratings.

And viewers aren't stupid, they know when a show isn't working, it is shunted to a graveyard timeslot, and while 9:50 isn't quite that, it is close enough, and who will want to jump on board an unpopular show?

But most importantly, Ten is putting it in direct competition with Q and A- its nemesis, or older cousin, if you prefer. And CoW needs some of that Q and A audience, but who would switch to Ten after watching 15 minutes of a more established, more settled, more sophisticated program?

And that's the other thing, Can of Worms is still finding its feet, so why pull the rug out from under it?

For what it's worth: Can of Worms is actually becoming a great show, and a valuable one at that. Even if it plays too much on its controversy and "awkward" factors, at least it is aiming to be a thoughtful and intelligent show.

And I believe that once MasterChef finishes, it will return to its old timeslot, but by that stage, I fear it may be too late to regain the 300-400 thousand viewers I fear it will lose.
Will you follow the show to 9:50 or do you think everyone else will?

Hayden from MasterChef calls Yumi Stynes "rude" for saying his food's "gross"

Quite an awkward exchange occurred this morning on Channel Ten's weekday chat show The Circle.

Hayden Quinn was eliminated from MasterChef last night, so he appeared to do the obligatory post-elimination interview on a Channel Ten program, but this isn't to say it would be all smooth-sailing.

After being praised for his good manners and general handsomeness, Yumi Stynes- never one to be part of a crowd- decided to launch one of her trademark uncomfortable and slightly inappropriate questions at Hayden.

"What were you thinking teaming up tapioca and fish. That is just gross..."

This related to his serving of  sesame coral trout, tapioca pearls and garlic cream last night, which turned out to be over-seasoned.

Hayden, noticeably taken aback returned with "Gross? Oh that's a bit rude... Peter Gilmore (chef) doesnt think it is gross"

Stynes, not content with how far she had pushed it added "Its sort of like frog spawn... Like its gooey..."

Hayden attempted to justify his cooking style: "There were all different textural elements". 

"The fish, the crust, the almonds, the vegetables and the tapioca pearls"

Jane Hall - filling in for Denise Drysdale - backed him up by having a light-hearted dig at Stynes: "... Says the woman who's been talking about rabbits' nuts all morning (Styne's pet rabbit is going to be de-sexed)

And Hayden just made things even more uncomfortable by saying "That could be on dinner tonight"

After the interview, Gorgi Coghlan said to Stynes "He was sticking it to you, Stynesy", to which Stynes replied "He's not sticking it to me" with a cheeky grin.

Jane Hall chastised Stynes only semi-jokingly, "Are you happy with yourself?"

By the look of Stynes, I think she was...

Opinion: Dancing vs. MasterChef: A Weary Battle

[caption id="attachment_740" align="alignnone" width="300" caption="Source: news.com.au"][/caption]

Yes, it's early days; MasterChef is just commencing its fourth week and Dancing has only just had its fourth instalment.

MasterChef is now in its third series, and Dancing with the Stars is in its eleventh, however for the sake of comparison, let's call it its fourth series in its newest iteration under new host Daniel McPherson.

On Sunday nights of late, viewers are seemingly spoilt for choice when it comes to reality competitions. Dancing kicks off at 6:30PM and MasterChef at 7:30PM, and this is accurately represented in the ratings figures.

Week 1: Dancing (1,505,000) beat MasterChef (1,503,000)

Week 2: Dancing (1,613,000) beat MasterChef (1,409,000)

Week 3: MasterChef (1,511,000) beat Dancing (1,429,000)

Source: TV Tonight

Due to this close ratings tussle, it would seem as if both shows are churning out more quality addictive content; more drama, more competitiveness, new twists, etc.

And to some extent this is true.

We have seen criticism of personal jibes at contestants (Dancing), controversy over cheating claims (Masterchef), professionals and judges spats (Dancing), spectacular triumphs and cringeworthy train-wrecks (both).

However, haven't we seen it all before?

TV News Wrap: Thursday May 19

Here's what's making news today.

The Age's Craig Mathieson gives a nice little explanation as to why Australia's Got Talent bested MasterChef on Tuesday night;

"Right now, Channel Ten's culinary extravaganza looks like an overly long journey, a forced march of a show that's become a massive brand that vigorously spruiks multiple brands and is hosted by various brands who judge contestants who are very keen to launch their own brands. Apparently, there is some is food involved, too."

I don't exactly agree with his glowing appraisal of Australia's Got Talent, as it can seem overly contrived at times, but the continual flogging of products, as well as the machine-like way it is going about its business every year will eventually contribute to its demise.

Did Lisa Edelstein (who recently exited Fox show House) jump or was she pushed? The TV Guru asks the question. Either way, it's gotta have a detrimental effect on the show, doesn't it?