mace wrote:

In its first season, Jeopardy occupied the 11;30 timeslot. When it moved to Noon in season two, it attracted a large audience of college students and businessmen on their lunch break. When NBC premiered Hollywood Squares in 1966 in Jeopardy's original timeslot, it gave NBC a lethal ratings boost until 1974 when Art Fleming's show was moved to 1:30pm and got destroyed by As The World Turns.

NBC didn't immediately bury Jeopardy! at 1:30 PM. NBC put J! up against CBS' The $10,000 Pyramid at 10:30 AM in January 1974 (ABC not programming in that timeslot). J! managed to do in Pyramid and keep up with its replacement, Gambit.
 

A problem I have with Canadian television at this point is the legacy brands are the stick, while the content agreement deals are the carrot. Maybe some of the more established brands make the cut in the future, but if Corus merges with Rogers or Bell it's more for OTA reach and existing content agreements, and less for actual brand value. Bell had no problem cannibalizing The Movie Network to bolster Crave. Rogers has the advantage of not having many existing TV brands, but it prioritizes Sportsnet over everything else. If foreign studio interests come into the picture, it makes more sense to establish production facilities first - as ViacomCBS does in Mississauga - then go for the company it has the strongest content agreements with.

There's also ATSC 3.0 to consider. If Bell, Rogers, and/or Corus sees an advantage to OTA-based subscription services, those companies could feasibly pare things down to "core" brands and go from there. That's at least a tangible investment, rather than reducing local spending and stapling the "evolving business model" line without actually doing anything.

As long as The Simpsons is in Fox's scripted top three as far as the 18-49 demos go, I think it stays. Given that Bless the Harts has a second-season renewal, it's a toss-up as to whether Fox actually cancels its other adult animated series, though I can't understand what compels Family Guy to keep going when it has more active contempt for its own existence than does The Simpsons.

RadioAaron wrote:

There's CFPL AM/FM and TV in London, where the TV station isn't co-owned with the radio stations. Also, CKWS TV/FM in Kingston.

Don't know of any in different markets though, as I believe RA was wondering about.

In the current CKWS-FM's case, it dropped the CKWS call letters when it was an AM station in 1987, then readopted them in 2010, three years after moving to FM. The former CKWS-FM became CFMK-FM in 1976.

Also, there's WHAM-AM and WHAM-TV in Rochester - there, a case of "combine, rebrand and divest".

mace wrote:

The key is not to increase Canadian programming but increase Quality Canadian programming. If the scripts are well written, the episodes well produced and the characters being portrayed one can identify with, viewership will be regular and large. For example, Street Legal, Degrassi, Murdoch Mysteries were/are hugely successful programs.

Nostalgia for the old show didn't help the recent Street Legal revival. MM also has a decent fanbase, but its being on Citytv was a holdover from CHUM ownership and its ratings improved once on CBC.

Personally, I think production companies care more about how exportable a series is, while broadcasters and streamers care more about return on investment. Sometimes domestic performance in Canada is enough, but shows more often than not have to bend over for the foreign markets. That was the case with the recent years of the Degrassi franchise, where it was on The N/TeenNick in the US, then Netflix. Even though DHX Media bought both Epitome Pictures and Family Channel around 2013-14, Family didn't go it alone with Next Class once Netflix pulled out.

I get the "don't make subpar content to meet CanCon regulations" and "make a show that Canadians identify with" arguments. Even the high-quality shows have to deal with the realities of cultural sausage-making. I just cringe whenever Netflix-tax articles come up, since they focus most heavily on foreign-service transparency and protectionist measures, while ignoring things like production-company consolidation (see: DHX Media, Kew Media Group, Boat Rocker, 9 Story, Entertainment One).

Dale Patterson wrote:

What amazes me is that rarely are the results leaked. It did happen in 2004, however.

https://www.thespec.com/whatson-story/9336360-why-no-one-has-leaked-jeopardy-spoilers-about-james-holzhauer-s-incredible-winning-streak/

Even if Holzhauer's run is spoiled, it won't hurt Jeopardy!'s ratings. He already has the media coverage and the single-game record-setting strategy. It's why I find "he's not Ken Jennings in ratings" articles to miss the point. You have to build the Ken Jennings benchmark in order to possibly surpass it - plus, it's not like Holzhauer's going to be banned from Tournament of Champions and/or "ultimate tournament" games unless he pulls a Barbara Lowe or a Jerry Slowik.