Prospect of ‘Safe’ TV Season Harbors Scary Possibilities
I know a lot of people will be relieved to hear that the early word on the fall prime-time season is: “It’s going to be a safe one.”
After being assaulted this past season by programming that set new lows for standards of taste and decency, it’s a natural reaction.
We all needed a break.
So, anticipating a brave new Big Brotherly world of V-chips and ratings, the four major networks--ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC--have apparently decided to make nice in prime time.
But I find the news a little frightening.
Why? Because I know the networks are--as one of ABC’s big sitcoms for the fall suggests--”Clueless.”
That’s one of the reasons their combined audience keeps dropping--from a 44.2 rating and 72 share of TV households in the 1993-94 season and then a 41.9 rating and 69 share in 1994-95 to a 39.2 rating and 65 share this past season.
They don’t seem to know the difference between a safe show and a good show.
I do. And I think you do, too.
But just in case somebody at the networks is reading, let’s review: What is safe?
For a viewer: It means security. It means not worrying about what you’re watching or who you’re watching with--your wife, your mother, your father, your kids, the churchgoing neighbors. . . .
It means more than PG.
It means quality. It means integrity. It means consistency. It means treating a viewer with respect.
Unfortunately, from a network point of view, a safe show is usually--more than anything else--a show that’s most likely to succeed.
That’s why we’re getting Bill Cosby, Ted Danson and Michael J. Fox next season. All are major TV stars from much-beloved series of the recent past who therefore guarantee what is known in the business as sampling--a look-see by viewers--and safety.
That’s why we keep getting new series based on movies such as “Clueless.” The networks are insecure. They don’t even trust their own ideas.
All too often, a safe show in the distorted prism of network thinking is an innocuous show. A bland show. A show that doesn’t take too many chances. A show that looks like a lot of other shows. Where are the safe shows?
There’s safety and quality in ABC’s “Home Improvement” and “Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman,” in CBS’ “Murphy Brown” and “Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman” and in NBC’s “Frasier.” But there’s only safety--network-style--in shows such as ABC’s “Second Noah” and “Coach,” CBS’ “Dave’s World” and “Diagnosis Murder” and NBC’s “Caroline in the City.”
Chances are, not too many of your prime-time favorites are on that “safe list.”
That’s because many of the best and most successful shows in recent TV history have not played it safe week after week.
Want a good show that’s safe most of the time?
Try ABC’s “Roseanne,” NBC’s “Seinfeld,” “Mad About You” and “3rd Rock From the Sun” and Fox’s “Party of Five.”
A little riskier. . . .
Try NBC’s “Friends” and CBS’ “Cybill,” Fox’s “Beverly Hills, 90210” and “The Simpsons.”
What the heck, give one of the newsmagazines a shot. Unsafe shows that are the best.
Programming with an eye toward the family--say from 8 to 9 weeknights--is one thing. But prime-time TV viewing is, perhaps more than ever, a grown-up sport.
Want to just throw all caution to the wind and watch a great show? A show that might have legitimate but nevertheless adult content? Shows that don’t guarantee your viewing safety?
You’re talking about my favorites now: “The X-Files” on Fox, ABC’s “NYPD Blue” and “Murder One,” NBC’s “Homicide: Life on the Street,” “Law & Order” and “ER.”
That’s the kind of television that makes me secure.
That makes me believe the networks can turn things around.
I don’t want a safe season.
I want a good season.
More to Read
The complete guide to home viewing
Get Screen Gab for everything about the TV shows and streaming movies everyone’s talking about.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.