In a move proving once again that Hollywood is too stupid to realize that nothing makes everyone happy, Sci Fi is dumping their name because they think it's a negative that keeps more of the mass audience from checking them out.
In corporate speak:
“What we love about this is we hopefully get the best of both worlds,” Mr. Howe said. “We’ll get the heritage and the track record of success, and we’ll build off of that to build a broader, more open and accessible and relatable and human-friendly brand.”
What the fuck is a "human-friendly brand"? Isn't this really a case of hoping people too stupid to realize SyFy = Sci Fi will tune in to watch?
As for their loyal current fans, apparently, SyFy hates you:
“The name Sci Fi has been associated with geeks and dysfunctional, antisocial boys in their basements with video games and stuff like that, as opposed to the general public and the female audience in particular,” said TV historian Tim Brooks, who helped launch Sci Fi Channel when he worked at USA Network.
Of course, who did they test this new name with...:
“When we tested this new name, the thing that we got back from our 18-to-34 techno-savvy crowd, which is quite a lot of our audience, is actually this is how you’d text it,” Mr. Howe said. “It made us feel much cooler, much more cutting-edge, much more hip, which was kind of bang-on what we wanted to achieve communication-wise.”
Can someone explain to them that this "18-34 techno savvy crowd" are the very people that Mr. Brooks insults above?
Because sometimes, the corporate ignorance writes its own jokes:
“We spent a lot of time in the ’90s trying to distance the network from science fiction, which is largely why it’s called Sci Fi,” Mr. Brooks said. “It’s somewhat cooler and better than the name ‘Science Fiction.’ But even the name Sci Fi is limiting.”
Oh and if you were thinking Sci Fi was a failing network, think again:
Sci Fi is coming off the best year in its history. In primetime it ranked 13th in total viewers among ad-supported cable networks in 2008. It’s a top-10 network in both adults 18 to 49 (up 4%) and adults 25 to 54 (up 6%).
During its fourth-quarter earnings call, parent General Electric said Sci Fi racked up a double-digit increase in operating earnings despite the beginnings of the recession.
Personally, I think Sci Fi would have a much larger audience if they had made different programming decisions over the years:
-Instead of trying to save crappy shows, they should have saved "Space: Above and Beyond" and " Firefly".
-They should have put less money into their laughable self-produced movies and instead produced a new ongoing series based on "The Walking Dead" or "World War Z".
-Fewer infomercials during late night. Sure, that's a traditional time for them, but not for the Sci Fi core audience.
“Activism is a way for useless people to feel important, even if the consequences of their activism are counterproductive for those they claim to be helping and damaging to the fabric of society as a whole.” - Dr Thomas Sowell
Kib Bibens, COO of the ABC Language Exchange in New York confirmed to B&C that “Syfy”-the name Sci-Fi channel has adopted as part of its recent re-brand-is in fact Polish slang for syphilis.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
The laughable self-produced movies makes a KILLING for them. I read an article on them a while back and the #s, and it was amazing.
Yeah, even crappy films make money, anyone can figure that out by looking at the walls of a typical video store. The point, however, wasn't so much about the cash they made, but the reputation they've earned.
My point was that they aren't focused on "Sci Fi" or the audience looking for it.
Oh, they have shown wrestling forever. Not sure how SCI FI that is.
That was a package deal with NBC as wrestling is one of USA's flagship shows, but you're right. It makes zero sense being on Sci Fi.
As for their shows, only Eureka is an original concept. The other three (have there been more?) are either Battlestar or Stargate, which both got their start elsewhere in films and/or TV. (Side note: Eureka isn't bad.)
They focus so much on bad movies that it seems like they're not even trying to make any new original series.
Meanwhile USA is destroying cable ratings records with Monk, Psych, Burn Notice, In Plain Sight, etc. (Nickelodeon is the actual cable king, but for all day ratings. The reasons behind their success is obvious.) TNT is skyrocketing forward despite dropping movies and airing way, way, way too fucking many Law & Order reruns because they've got a few new hit original series going (The Closer is the #1 rated ad supported cable show ever.). TBS, FX, Disney, Bravo, Lifetime, etc., etc., etc. are all getting it done with original programming, not with reruns (which are fine for daytime and late night programming) and bad movies that confuse the brand.
Being that Sci Fi is under the NBC banner, it doesn't shock me that they don't have a clue on how to program. It's more shocking that USA, also under NBC's banner, does as well as it does. NBC, once the mighty giant of network programming, doesn't have a fucking clue what they're doing right now. I swear they hired former Fox executives to do their scheduling.
“Activism is a way for useless people to feel important, even if the consequences of their activism are counterproductive for those they claim to be helping and damaging to the fabric of society as a whole.” - Dr Thomas Sowell
