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?

Opinion: Is Can of Worms' Controversy Ploy Working, or Blowing Up In Its Face?

So, it turns out that Can of Worms is turning out to be quite the little trouble-maker.

Yes, the show itself is the one behind all of this mischief and controversy and the like, not the loudmouths seemingly spouting out this rubbish.

Well, that’s not entirely true, but it’s certainly a ploy that is becoming increasingly more apparent.

The show set out to cause trouble, as set out in its mission statement; 

"There can never be a ‘wrong answer’ on Can of Worms. Our guests won’t be expected to give an expert opinion or politically correct view." 

So, everything was fair game- nothing was off limits, apparently. And everyone soon found out that they would stick very close to their word, and last night was the perfect example of it.
 John Elliot, a former Liberal Party President and Carlton Football Club President, has found himself in hot water after saying the word "Abos" to refer to Aborigines. And he is quite rightly copping a savaging in the media for it. But in the end, who is more at fault, John Elliot, or Ten for airing it?


Well, I'd even go further than that and say the show is more at fault for getting him on in the first place. For the past three weeks or Can of Worms' run, I've been critical of their decision to plug the show with loudmouths such as Jason Akermanis in Episode 1, and hoped it wasn't a trend that would continue.


It wasn't so much that I disagree with what Akermanis or Elliot said, but the way they go about getting their point across, and the fact that they are usually not able to support them with well-reasoned points. 

Opinion: How Offspring got it so right, so quickly

It’s easy to see why Offspring isn’t pulling huge numbers.

Not bad numbers, by any stretch, as anything which can consistently pull figures around the 1m mark is valuable to any network.

And this dramatic shift has only been validated by its recent third season renewal after its first five episodes have scored 927,000, 760,000 (in a later timeslot), 905,000 and 953,000 and 954,000, 982,000 and 995,000 respectively.

However, while these seem to be decent numbers, they pale in comparison to the ratings juggernaut that is Packed to the Rafters (its last six episodes rated 1.943, 1.815, 1.796, 1.748, 1.806, 1.709 million repsectively)- a show waiting to burst back on to the scene in the second half of the year.

Offspring in many ways deserves to be up there with Packed to the Rafters, however many still regard it as a "chick show", possibly because of its female lead, as well as its flowery title font, as well as the underlying motifs of pregancy, relationships and commitment... who knows. But the fact is, it's anything but a Sex and the City clone, for want of a better example, and it deserves much more praise than it gets.

But possibly the reason for that is, is that it has suffered from a particularly average first season. Let me refresh your memory;

The first episode of the first season opened to Asher Keddie swimming in a pool, an actress that would have been known for her work on acclaimed Australian drama Love My Way, but possibly better known for her more recent work on the second series of Underbelly, given its run on Free to Air rather than Pay TV.

However, many remarked on the striking similarities between the pool shot and The Secret Life of Us’ frequent activity around similar places.

Then came the inner monologue voice over while Keddie was swimming.

Then came the clumsy bump into the wall at the end of the pool lane.

So that presumably was to tell viewers everything they needed to know about Nina’s personality; words like “awkward”, “clumsy”, “obsessive” and “frazzled” were meant to spring to mind.

And that was just her personality- from then on it wasn’t that hard to guess how the rest of her life was structured.

Hectic yet rewarding job? Check - she’s an obstetrician.

Sibling who is the polar opposite? Check - her sister Billie is seen tearing the clothes off a gardner (this was also used in the promo) soon after we meet her.

Other siblings to add some spice? Check - meet unemployed brother Jimmy.

Separated parents symbolising her fractured personality? Check.

And then there was the work situation, which has also been fused with her love-life and friendships.

There were the somewhat flirty somewhat bitchy somewhat playful nurses.

And then there was the love interest, played by Don Hany, a character which seemed would haunt every one of Nina’s dreams for the entire series.

And it did to some extent, with the “will-they won’t-they” dynamic being well established from the first episode.

There was also a parallel relationship established with her sister Billie and Mick, with a similar dynamic.

Yes, it was one of “those” shows- leaving gender out of it, it was one of those “Oh, isn’t life hard in this day and age? You know, trying to balance our jobs with our personal life, etc. etc.”

But this is not to say that it was a bad show. It was a perfectly fine, even a good Australian drama.

And it burst on to the scene as a fresh new Australian drama with a focus that wasn't directly on a family, nor was it on a bunch of cops, nor a bunch of crooks, or people "rescuing" other people.

But it just couldn’t match the ease with which Packed to the Rafters churned out breezy, yet addictive storytelling. However, it was still head and shoulders above the likes of Rescue: Special Ops, Sea Patrol and even Rush.

So what did Packed to the Rafters have that Offspring didn’t?

Continue reading...