DanJKroll

Oh Dan What a GREAT question and a FABULOUS blog entry!!!!

I think in the cases of ATWT and GL the "gay" story lines had nothing to do with the soaps being canceled. I think it was just coincidence that they ended/are ending with gay storylines.

As you stated it became chic to have gay characters [dating] on soaps.....
BUT at the same time and before....Daytime serials were hemorrhaging viewers. For many reason, none I think had to do with "gay storyline"

You stated
"Perhaps, gay and lesbian characters are painted with too broad a stroke and the nuances that make each character unique are not being explored."

Now this I agree with!
I feel when a lot of these shows added a "gay" character that's EXACTLY what it was........ the "token" gay character.

So I do not think soap fans are mainly homophobic, of course there are some that are but when you have a character in your face just b/c they are gay, it will turn some people off...including many LGBT.

That's probably why Bianca's story worked so well and was so beautiful.......b/c it was just that...a story.

She was not a token gay character she was not made gay(by the writers) just to be a "gay" character. Of course being first and groundbreaking made it easier to be accepted and to be original.

If AMC was to do a "gay" story again I'm not sure it will take off as well.
Maybe that's also why most of Bianca's relationships did not work.....after the first one or two it may have started to seem to some "oh here comes the (token) lesbian to be Bianca's next GF"

I guess I think if you write a compelling story and it makes sense and just tells a story people will accept it whether it includes black or whites, straight or gays or any combination.

So overall I'm not sure but in my heart I have to and WANT to believe that most daytime viewers are NOT homophobic and just want a REAL, GOOD, & BELIEVABLE STORY!

Just to nitpick a little, Dan...I know you're an AMC authority but I seem to remember Bianca being re-introduced as a lesbian back in the late 1990's, instead of in 2000.

Bianca came out in Dec of 2000...almost 2001

Is it fair to generalize the average soap viewer as being socially conservative? Or in this case, are social conservatives merely the most vocal viewer segment? Perhaps a better question: Are production companies themselves socially conservative, or at the very least more sympathetic to their socially conservative demographic?

It's a very interesting series of questions raised by Dan, if only because in decades past soap operas were often at the forefront of social issues. What changed?

Money, or rather the lack of it, changed everything. With so little to go around, taking a chance on controversy, particularly a fair-minded, fully realized epic soap storyline about a gay couple was, and still is, deemed as too much of a financial risk -- say, if 500,000 viewers (out of maybe 3 or 4 million) suddenly stopped watching.

I firmly believe a soap opera out there needs to take some serious chances to recapture audience share, and I think that sort of chance is reliant upon faith that the DVR viewer is out there -- REALLY out there. That people will make up their minds to DVR a soap opera that tackles issues that don't continue to underestimate their audience -- that stop catering to social conservatives only.

People will tune in again, will watch, if they stop being short-shrifted by inane and redundant story lines.

Soaps were the canary in the coal mine. Soaps foretold the fracturing viewership which has come to invade all of traditional televised media. There are simply too many other options to grab the attention of those of us who appreciate more sophisticated visually presented fiction.

These days, it's oh-so apparent how the same problems are hitting network primetime HARD. Very hard. Just look at Southland getting canceled before it's second season ever hit the airwaves. Instead of good, intelligent TV networks rely on three Law and Orders (albeit on on a cable network), three CSIs, soon-to-be two Criminal Minds, and reality show after reality show.

Like Proctor & Gamble and other soap-affiliated production companies, TV network executives are now doing the very same thing -- catering to the least discerning audience -- that bulk of us that doesn't mind being told the same police procedural story over and over again on close to a dozen different-but-same cop shows -- it's fair to include House, Bones, The Mentalist, etc. -- even if they aren't (yet) duplicated.

We're a more cynical, smarter bunch overall these days. We flock to the niche shows that appeal to us to get away from the mundanity of more traditional daytime and primetime network TV.

There's a reason people pay to watch premium quality cable fare on HBO and Showtime. (They're paying -- either monthly or when the DVDs are released). People pay because they're simply worth it. Supplement shows like Dexter and True Blood (the latter of questionable quality, in my opinion, although I haven't yet seen season 2) with good free TV like Mad Men, Southland, Breaking Bad, Damages, and others -- well, you've got a completely fractured audience that DVRs what they can and watches when they can. Sure, they all get less than stellar ratings, but add them up and are the numbers so different from the viewership totals in the 70s or 80s?

No doubt the internet and our "always-on" connectedness plays a large part in declining viewership -- but is this only because we find that connectedness more compelling than watching the same tired and predictable story lines over and over again?

Daytime TV needs to uncover its own Harry Potter. Daytime needs to tap into the zeitgeist, and do so believably and memorably. So many independent films are made on shoe-string budgets that are simply compelling and incredible experiences -- and have magical box office results -- and these films prove that it's NOT about how much money is used. It's about the talent behind the camera that makes it happen.

The fact that soap operas haven't figured this out yet reminds me of US carmakers that had decades to improve their reliability to match overseas competitors and simply failed to do it -- and required bailing out by the US government.

It's quite sad.

There is soooo much story line fodder out there. I think writers do try to tap into that. But when everything gets dressed up in such mediocrity and unbelievability, even good ideas don't get much of a chance.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about: Let's say some soap somewhere wanted to create a new soap family, like the Newmans or the Abbotts or the Snyders, and ground it upon a gay couple. Now that's a seriously good idea, in my estimation.

My first question: Where are they going to live? Most characters these days bounce around these days from house to house or hotel room to hotel room because there's no money (or room) to build a new set.

How are we supposed to take ANY of this seriously when so many characters live out of hotel rooms or live in the same houses over and over again?

It's all quite ridiculous.

Want to draw readers back to soaps that are NOT homophobic and that DO appreciate challenging, ahead-of-their time story lines? How about some intelligent stories?

How long are these writers and producers going to bang heads against the wall?

Y & R just finished up their latest baby switch storyline.

What COMPELLING television.

I'm only an expert at being an ordinary woman in her 30'es, I don't have a gay brother, or close relation and don't consider myself the most ardent supporter of gay rights. Maybe that makes me "uneducated" on the topic, but then again it makes me the same as a huge part of the audience.

I can't talk about GL and ATWT, but I think OLTL is in a position where no matter if KISH is popular or not, if it will gain viewers or lose them, it can't afford uncertainty.

As they are pulling the big guns, Kevin Buchanan is back on canvas, new emphasis is put on the Cramers, Gina Tognoni is back, etc, OLTL is clearly making a big effort to see whether there is still viewers and advertisers to support the show.

It's not enough that viewers will make letter campaigns to keep Kish on screen. They also have to convince advertisers to put money in the show. And no matter how chilly TV execs can be, the person responsible for a big advertisement campaign can be even more.

I think it can't afford to take a risk, despite the critical acclaim the story so far has garnered.

Also, despite the fact that I'm not terribly interested in yet another gay coming out story (we seem to have them on every other show), I am interested in the romance and the problems Kish face. It is/was a well written romance, it just happened to be between two men, and their specific problems were part of it but other emotional issues were not ignored because it was a gay relationship.

What started to turn me off, and maybe as a hetero woman, this is purely ignorance or what have you, but it annoyed me when the writers took what was a well written love story and started to branch it out into a massive socio-political commentary (around the Llanview mayor election). It felt preachy.

And I believe a soap is not the medium to "educate" me. Vain as I am, I believe I am smarter than the writing syngergy of the OLTL team. If I want to form an opinion on gay marriage, I will read better opinions from both sides of the argument. The show lost me, not when it presented arguments for just one side, but when they made it a foregone conclusion. (Remember on OLTL there are no intelligent or reasonable opponents to gay marriage, the only ones that exist are bigots and crackpots).

No matter that this conclusion the show wants everyone to accept is the same conclusion I believe in.

Since then, the story and preachiness of it have been dialed down a bit, but the show was/is? gearing towards an even harder debate on gay parenthood. No matter what I believe on the topic, I believe the current writing team doesn't have the tact or distance to do a good job of presenting the argument in a way that will satisfy people who are pro and not offend people who are con.

It'd be a much bigger risk. And strategically, OLTL is just not up for anything that might rock the boat too hard.

i don't know if you deleted my comment - but i was asking you to see that using gay as a prefix or noun distorts the meaning of the blog to the readers and is wrong, which is the general problem with fans etc, wrong context. they think GAY characters instead of characters who are gay.

ppl are distracted by their preconceptions of what they think gay is or means, therefore they turn off on the simple notion of GAY anything, ignoring the character or story line as "A/THE GAY - -".
sorry if i did something wrong the first time.

ps what is hulu, youtube, soapnet or ABC.com worth? you'd think most ppl watch that way - ppl work during the day.

jams and MissShasta, you both make some absolutely amazing and on point points. As much as I criticize the writers, I think some have shown they are willing to take the risk to at least broach a subject. At the end of the day, its most likely the suits who are afraid of taking the risk. And really, has playing it safe worked for soaps in the past decade? I don't think so. Maybe its bought them some time. But I am just tired of the current crop of soaps merely "treading water." Stories need to be bold, cutting edge and risky. Not predictable, purposely polarizing and offensive. Cable and some network primetime shows have figured this out

It is unfortunate that Kish will no longer be gracing my screen, I've liked and rooted for this pair for pair even before it became obvious as to where it was headed and I'm a 50 something hetro woman living in the midwest. I also happen to think that Mitch has approached the realm of cartoon villiany and Dorian's group wedding was crass and insulting to anyone of any demographic. With that said, I think we need to look at the bigger picture, which is what people on this blog seem to be doing. OLTL didn't just bounce Kish, they shed five characters and if you look at those characters, you'll see that they all had one thing in common...the Stacy Morasco SL. Stacy didn't work in a big way and they are taking the same scorched earth policy they did when they tried to introduce the Sante family. The same thing happened on GH with the Eckharts. When something doesn't work on a soap, the suits obliterate all traces of error regardless of what story lines become collateral damage.

The biggest complaint I've seen on this and every other soap board I've visited or lurked on is predictability. Whether it be who's the daddy, baby switch or back from the dead...again, we've been there, done that and bought the tee, the stories are recycled because the talent is recycled. The daytime industry is a closed loop and has been for a very long time. They do the same stories because they are the same writers, directors, producers etc. moving from soap to soap unwilling or unable to act on an original idea. Why? because originality isn't rewarded in mainstream television. If it were, we wouldn't see the parade of CSI's and Law and Orders out there. To break the cycle, they need to break the loop. Look outside of daytime for their writers, directors etc. Originality and diversity is thriving on cable, proving the sentiment "If you build it, they will come."

Having gay family members myself, I just don't see what the problem is. Maybe it is because most gays, like the rest of us, live lives like the rest of the world...... school, jobs, watching movies, cooking, buying a house, planting gardens, etc. Maybe the big stink with the protesters is they expect something disgusting and so yell before they watch. The straight people on the shows are the ones who get disgusting, have affairs, divorces,, etc. to keep them interesting. JMO

I'd love to see more gay characters but not as ones that are just the token gay characters for a soap opera. I don't want to be preached about gay being "wrong" or "right", just to have a storyline where they are included without one of the partners turns out to be bi or sexually confused in the end.

Originally Posted by notronaj

Having gay family members myself, I just don't see what the problem is. Maybe it is because most gays, like the rest of us, live lives like the rest of the world...... school, jobs, watching movies, cooking, buying a house, planting gardens, etc. Maybe the big stink with the protesters is they expect something disgusting and so yell before they watch. The straight people on the shows are the ones who get disgusting, have affairs, divorces,, etc. to keep them interesting. JMO

I am an older soap fan. I think you have hit the nail on the head. I think that the image of the flaming or drag queen has made all of us older viewers scared of what we might see and alot have prejudged a storyline before it's even been introduced. I know gay people , who live just as everybody else, as you said they go to work, shop and live like I do, which is to treat people with respect and kindness. I also as a former cosmetologist have seen the other kind also and they do disturb me a little, I'm being honest here. I am a Christian who has been told before, that I shouldn't be watching the soaps anyway because they promote and glorify bad behavior. I like to think I'm a free thinker and if I feel condemned for watching something then I'll quit. I have a brain and know when things are wrong. I refuse to judge anybody, but as I said, I do have a problem with the out there gay or drag queen. they promote a wild totally different way of life that I don't like. I just don't care for them, but I wouldn't condemn them or judge them as a whole, the few that I have seen, just bothered me. This is what people won't say out loud , but I am and I think this is what a lot of people who watch soaps are afraid will be forced down our throats so they just turn away from accepting gays all together. My generation will eventually die out and these things will be the norm for alot of the new generation, just as free love was for my generation. I am not God and don't judge anybody, it's not my job, it's his. I do have opinions and feelings, that are as important to me as everyone's is to them. Now having said all that , I have watched several gay scenarios on the soaps over the years, and the writing for their love stories has been pretty lame, or just not interesting enough to get into them, that was the only thing I found wrong and while I don't agree with the adulterers, murders, liars or anything else I have seen on the soaps, I have always just watched or not, storielines that are interesting and make me think. Classless or untalented writers will loose viewers faster than anything else, not if someone is gay . I've been more upset about a story on adultery than anything else. Just one old ladies opinion.

I think the biggest problem is that sex sells and it's hard to sell homosexual sex. Kyle and Oliver were the only monogamous couple between the ages of 25 - 50. There are no committed relationships in daytime television anymore. All the sex, with multiple partners, bores me. I think it is harder, thus a better story, to have a couple deal with life. I was looking forward to watching that Oliver and Kyle work though some of life's challenges, together.

I worry about the viewers who would quit watching a soap because two men love each other, but apparently have no problem with OLTL's main romantic lead being a serial rapist. Seems like very screwed up priorities. I also marvel at how sheltered some people seem to be, like they've never known someone who is gay. Do they really not realize they are just like the rest of us. Seriously, they've never even had a gay co-worker? If that is true, then ironically they're the ones that needed Kish most of all. Fish is a cop. Kyle a medical student. They had to overcome obstacles to be together. It doesn't get more mainstream soap romance than that.

Why do people watch soaps in the first place? Isn't it Love Conquers All? Yes, they enjoy other elements of a soap, but it's all about Love. They want to watch a couple struggle to be together, to fight against the odds, to overcomes obstacles (both internal and external) to be together. In the past, soap writers knew how to keep a couple apart but still keep the audience rooting for them. When the couple finally got together, it was very satisfying because they had earned it. The problem is that today's soap writers get it wrong most of the time.

For all extents and purposes, Kish was an old-fashioned love story that was actually written pretty well for a change, which is why it's so ironic that it's considered controversial.

Personally, I do not believe most protests against Kish or Nuke or Otalia came from real soap viewers. Maybe some of it was, but most came from well-organized groups with socially conservative agendas.

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]There is a general problem with daytime storytelling and is exacerbated by a gay storyline. On daytime its all about the getting to be a couple never about working to stay a couple. There is a set pattern, they meet, they fight, they fall in love, they battle the odds to be together, they get together. The writers have no idea what to do at this point so either a third party is brought in to break them up or one of them is killed. Find a new love interest and repeat the process.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]This leads to retread stories and rehashed plots all over daytime. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]This gets more difficult if the couple is same sex. Writers can't just dive into their writing-for-daytime-101-bag-of tricks and have them date another random character on the show. And once they are together, unless one is confused (again retread) there isn't going to be a who's the daddy story. The writers would actually have to write a compelling story that has the couple stay together. This would require innovation and original thinking which daytime hasn't been good at in a long time.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Soaps in general are in trouble because of their predictability and with extremely rare exception such as KISH, unwillingness to try anything new. I used to watch many of the soaps now I am down to only OLTL and ATWT. I neither tuned in or tuned out of them because of the gay stories. I took each as it came as I do with all new storylines or characters and decided if I was interested in watching. I loved the Kyle and Oliver storyline and feel they are being scapegoated because of the preachy big gay wedding story and the awful Stacy Morasco storyline. They were the only part worth watching in either of those, and their story had some of the best writing and acting on that show in years. I only recently started watching the Noah, Luke, Reid characters on ATWT because prior to the addition of Reid, they were boring. Before the addition of Reid I fast forwarded through their scenes.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]This is my problem with people saying they are going to tune out or protest to the show or network if gays are on a soap. If you don't like a character or a storyline it is called a fast forward button. If you can fast forward through the boring, or the redemption of a murderer or rapist, rape, incest, drug use, adultery, or whatever offends you without writing or calling the network to complain then why not the gay or lesbian characters?[/FONT][/COLOR]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT][/SIZE]

It seems that gay storylines are now the "in" thing to do, even if not embraced by the soap viewers. Personally, I can accept people's sexuality but I do not put myself in situations where I have to watch PDAs beyond hand-holding by non-hetero couples. Homosexuality is not a viable choice for me or my children. I don't condone it, I do not think it is psychologically normal, and I don't want to be around the practice of it. Nevertheless, I accept individual choice as long the lifestyle is not shoved down my throat. To me, it is the same as any other deviant sexual behavior, and I don't want to see S&M, incest, pedophilia, or bestiality storylines either. I wish soaps went back to stories that didn't focus so much on sex, but on the common human experiences and emotions we can all relate to, no matter our gender, race, faith, or sexual orientation.

No, it is foolish to suggest that the Kish storyline really is the main reason for OLTL’s sinking ratings, or even 'a' reason.

As I said on my own blog, "I am not a big fan of gay storylines, but ever since Amelia left town, this one has risen above the preachy You-Got-to-Accept-Us rhetoric and has been a gem of a human interest story." Once the Dorian's wedding silliness was over and the stereotypic Amelia and Nick gone, we had two characters who were already properly sized to the canvas, neither too broad nor too narrow. People like Kish because it has the characters acting like people, not reacting to being trapped in a burning barn with a knife-wielding maniac during a volcanic eruption which had caused Llantano Dam to burst during a tornado after dark.

The tandem stories that are tanking OLTL are the character destroying ones. Both Mitch and Stacy are mentally deranged and these two people have destroyed over half the cast in one way or another. Charlie, Dorian, Rex, Schuyler, Gigi, Jessica, Natalie… the list could go on but all of these characters have had major personality changes caused by the stories—to the point where I have seen better consistency of character in recasts! Many have argued more eloquently than I can that it is the loss of character-driven stories that has caused the ratings to decline, and they are right.

One other thing that has hurt far more than any politically correct entertainment-media gurus will admit is that the Mitch Laurence story is highly offensive to many people of faith. Every week he mocks scripture by using it wildly out of context. This audience will not threaten boycotts though, they will just go away, and they have.

More here:
http://boards.soapcentral.com/blog.php?b=2828

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Here is a thought how about they hire real gay actors and actresses instead of people are playing at being gay and the story line. Their story line was boring Fish so scared all the time what a wimp. I agree it is offensive to people's faith with all of these scriptures that are not correct and yes we stop watching, with Mitch and all these deranged people is getting old, I read they are going to have another musical in the next few months that is going to be good the last ones they had were good. [/FONT][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=abbazwoman;bt5573]It seems that gay storylines are now the "in" thing to do, even if not embraced by the soap viewers. Personally, I can accept people's sexuality but I do not put myself in situations where I have to watch PDAs beyond hand-holding by non-hetero couples. Homosexuality is not a viable choice for me or my children. I don't condone it, I do not think it is psychologically normal, and I don't want to be around the practice of it. Nevertheless, I accept individual choice as long the lifestyle is not shoved down my throat. To me, it is the same as any other deviant sexual behavior, and I don't want to see S&M, incest, pedophilia, or bestiality storylines either. I wish soaps went back to stories that didn't focus so much on sex, but on the common human experiences and emotions we can all relate to, no matter our gender, race, faith, or sexual orientation.[/QUOTE]

Oral sex was once considered deviant. As was anything more adventurous than the missionary position.

From Wikipedia: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders:

Critics of these and other controversial diagnoses often cite the DSM's previous inclusion of homosexuality, and the APA's eventual decision to remove it, as a precedent for current disputes.[52] That 1974 decision is still challenged by some, mainly conservative and religious, groups who maintain that its removal does not decide empirical issues relating to statistical infrequency, personal distress, maladaptiveness or deviation from social norms.[53] [B]However, the consensus from the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, and other institutions in other countries, is that the research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality.[/B][54][55]

Knowledge makes me happy.

Fabulous post. The exodus has nothing so much to do with Kish as it has to do with Mitch from the dead" for the nine-thousandth time and the most ridiculous story of the year on any soap: Jessica in high school! God bless that actress for showing up to work every day!
Back from the dead. Baby switch. Who the baby daddy. Hurt me, beat me, make me scream. Rape me, kidnap me, kill my dog. Oh, but I still love you. Ugh!!!

Dan, I am listening to your radio show on the web and it is great. I encourage everyone to listen. Fairman and you are a great team. I have to admit I will be the minority on the Kish storyline. If OLTL had allowed them to be a couple and left out the rest of the big gay push I think they would have had a chance. But the Dorian big gay wedding for example is preaching versus teaching.