• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Let's Give Joan Rivers Her Due

So it's Rivers we thank for the programming disaster that is Fox?

There are about a half-dozen "personalities" that cause me to immediately hit the channel button when they come on. Rivers is in position #1.
 
So it's Rivers we thank for the programming disaster that is Fox?

There are about a half-dozen "personalities" that cause me to immediately hit the channel button when they come on. Rivers is in position #1.

How in the heck is FOX a programming disaster? Like when on a regular basis they will lead with programming in a time period?

Just because you don't care for Joan Rivers does not make FOX TV a programming disaster.

Perhaps you might think out your posts in your head before you make them.
 
She's not dead yet (as of 8/31/2014, 6:38 EDT) so it's a little early for any eulogies.

She's in a coma and being kept alive on machines. Her daughter won't let go. This is why people need to have a living will. DNRs and no heroic measures should be the default option under Medicare and people who want them should have to do a "living will" and then pay higher premiums.

After all, it was not Bart Simpson, or even Al Bundy, but it was she that technically put the Fox network on the map.

More misinformation from the Cockroach. It's one thing to speak well of the dying; another to distort history. Her ratings were terrible. Many affiliates would not carry or dropped the show. She lasted less than a season and then a bunch of temps followed before Fox gave up. They still don't have a late show. Arsenio Hall was one of the temps but he went and signed a syndication deal with Paramount.

Fox first got buzz and critical attention from Tracy Ullman and Gary Shandling. It first got ratings from The Simpsons. It first got credibility in the industry when it bought a bunch of established major market stations (poaching affiliates from the big three networks) and got the NFL. Like it's predecessor, Dumont, Fox was on the map but never at the center of the map.

And Joan Rivers was a major debacle that did not give the network cred. Joan was a good stand-up and interview guest but lacked the cool factor needed to wear well as a host in late night.
 
^Why did you find the first message a distortion of history since Joan Rivers really did technically put the network "on the map"? Also, why did you state the network still doesn't have a late show? It had other late shows after the one hosted by Joan Rivers such as "MADtv", "Talkshow with Spike Feresten", and "Animation Domination HD".
 
^Why did you find the first message a distortion of history since Joan Rivers really did technically put the network "on the map"? Also, why did you state the network still doesn't have a late show? It had other late shows after the one hosted by Joan Rivers such as "MADtv", "Talkshow with Spike Feresten", and "Animation Domination HD".

But those three were on Saturdays. And there was the God-awful Chevy Chase Show.
 
I agree that Joan did provide attention and cachet to the fledgling FOX network. At the time, it was Johnny and basically nothing else. Johnny won, but many people turned into Joan, who had often served as a co-host on The Tonight Show, giving the new network a level of legitimacy. Other innovative programming (at the time) like the irreverant 'Married with Children', 'COPS'. '21 Jump Street' and 'America's Most Wanted' made the network viable. 'Tracey Ullman' also had its fans.

Ms. Rivers had a very successful career. While my hope is that she recovers, every day she's in a coma makes that less likely.
 
Latest is the docs are trying to bring her out of the medically-induced coma. They say it still looks like she will either be a vegetable or at least spend her life in a wheel chair.

Joan was only of many failed challengers to Carson. Several did better and lasted longer, including Steve Allen (in syndication by Group W), Merv Griffin, Joey Bishop (with Regis), Dick Cavett and, of course, Arsenio. Attention: Sure. Cachet: Hardly. Credit is not due here. OK, she did do better than Bill Dana. Maybe better than Jack Lescoulie. About as well as Mike Wallace, Les Crane and Pat Sajak.
 
I'm sorry to hear this if it is true. But for all the bad things people say about her recent career, she was always talented (I say was in reference to her standup comedy, which she hasn't done lately) and it would be sad for her to go.
 
How in the heck is FOX a programming disaster? Like when on a regular basis they will lead with programming in a time period?

Fox has, without a doubt, the most baseline trash available consistently on OTA TV. You can count the "quality" shows on the fingers of one hand and have several fingers left over.

Just because you don't care for Joan Rivers does not make FOX TV a programming disaster.

I didn't tie the two - someone else did.

Perhaps you might think out your posts in your head before you make them.

Nothing wrong with my post.
 
I was never a big fan of Joan Rivers, but I hope she'll be able to survive this.

As for her talk show she blew her chance to become Carson's replacement when she went to Fox. Assuming he still decided to leave in the early 90's, she only had a few more years to go before Carson's retirement. Of course the other option to replace Carson could have still been David Letterman, who may have had a better chance vs. Rivers rather than Leno.
 
It's interesting that no one has mentioned her experience on The Apprentice. I think the public saw the real Joan on that show. She's a tough, smart lady. You don't keep working as long as she has in a business built on popular taste without being tough and smart. She's both. She keeps reinventing herself without really changing who she is. That's not easy to do. The other thing no one's talking about is why she had this throat surgery in the first place. She was working the night before, so it wasn't anything critical.
 
I was never a big fan of Joan Rivers, but I hope she'll be able to survive this.

As for her talk show she blew her chance to become Carson's replacement when she went to Fox. Assuming he still decided to leave in the early 90's, she only had a few more years to go before Carson's retirement. Of course the other option to replace Carson could have still been David Letterman, who may have had a better chance vs. Rivers rather than Leno.

I doubt she would have had a chance to replace Carson. That was NBC's choice. If Carson had any say, Letterman would have gotten the gig. But if Joan had stayed as permanent sub, nobody would have ever heard of Jay Leno.
 
I don't agree. Leno would've had success somewhere. Perhaps not on the scale of The Tonight Show, but success still. There was a reason he was picked as Carson's sub and endured. His standup act was successful and getting noticed. Almost a golden age of stand up comedy with him, Tim Allen and others in those years. I do agree that Rivers never had a shot as being Carson's replacement. NBC wanted to go younger. Rivers was a lot of things, but younger than Leno or Letterman she was not.
 
Fox has, without a doubt, the most baseline trash available consistently on OTA TV. You can count the "quality" shows on the fingers of one hand and have several fingers left over.
"Sleepy Hollow", "New Girl" and "Brooklyn Nine-Nine" are on Fox. I've never seen it but I've seen good things about "The Mindy Project".
 
After all, it was not Bart Simpson, or even Al Bundy, but it was she that technically put the Fox network on the map.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Late_Show_(1986_TV_series)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MckrtLdSIxs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHFHuARH0g0

Why would anyone assume that just because someone was on a brand new network first, they're what put that new network "on the map"? When Rivers hosted her late night talk show on Fox, there was no shortage of other late-night talk shows going up against Johnny Carson. Rivers was just another one, as good as many, and better than some. It was the prime time shows on Fox that caused the American viewing public to notice that there was a new network in town. "Married, With Children" and "The Tracey Ullman Show" were what put Fox on the map as a full-fledged, bona-fide Primetime TV Network.
 
Avid Listener: It does not behoove one who complains so vociferously about duplicate threads to make posts which repeat and duplicate the points made in earlier posts in the same thread.
 
Avid,

I believe you're in correct. Joan came on before CBS tried with Sajak and before Arsenio's show. She really was the only alternative to Carson. That she didn't succeed says less about her talent than it does about Johnny's. He remained the de facto standard until he retired, (yes, Arsenio was in place by 1992), but only then did CBS spend big bucks to produce a competitive late night show.

Sajak was a decent late night host. No one was going to seriously dent Johnny's ratings. Not him, Joan or Arsenio.

Joan generated a LOT of press. It led people to check out this new FOX network. While the ratings didn't ensure, it helped get the network noticed. She played a role in getting the net on the map.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom