I still think, considering all the other stuff that goes on at 8-10pm on Thursdays, Smallville/Supernatural pull respectable numbers. Even with this "decline."

It could be a lot of things... better/different programming on the other networks, increasing frustration with the entire lineup, or just general lower watching across the board.

I'm just really growing tired of the accusations that ratings are going down because a particular ship is (or isn't) going their way.

I'm pretty sure Gilmore Girls and Veronica Mars, especially, have gone down in recent months. 7th Heaven has done terribly all season, though I'd have to see those numbers.

One reason I was always pretty sure the CW wouldn't cancel Supernatural is because it's always been a solid performer, comparatively, in that 9pm timeslot. I'd say the same thing for Smallville on Thursdays at 8. Nothing on the network - except for maybe Top Model - would do as well in that time period.

I have never said ratings went down because of a particular 'ship. I think it's the overall quality of the show in general, and the way certain situations and events are handled.

For example, "Promise." I can think of dozens of ways that episode could have been done where the results would've been basically the same, but fans wouldn't have been quite as peeved.

So often, it's not the actual things that happen on SV that disappoint, but the way they are done. And SV usually manages to do things in the way guaranteed to make the largest number of fans roll their eyes.

Biterswete, just to be clear I wasn't just referring to you - it was a blanket statement. I don't want you to think I was picking on anybody in particular.

I see the ratings debate coming from all sides. For some of those who liked "Promise" you'd get the whole "no one watched Progeny because it's about Chloe." I just grow really weary from it all.

One interesting bit regarding ratings and response, though: I'm currently working on the Season 5 companion book and re-watching early Season 5 episodes, and I'm pretty much in awe of how good they are. And the ratings matched. Even the Clana, to me, wasn't nauseating, because it was free of the "secrets and lies" talk. Plus there was good stuff going on for Lex, Chloe, and several others all at the same time.

Then again, Season 5 was on a much healthier network, and had much better promotion and publicity behind it. The coming of Aquaman and James Marsters, Chloe knowing the secret and Clark and Lana finally getting together, and the promise of a big 100th episode - there was a lot to be excited about. Whereas this year we heard "Justice League" and once that was past it's like "now what?"

Lana. Endless Lana.

Which, I might add, was right around the time the ratings began to decline. Funny how that works out.

I don't think the ratings decline is so much about 'shipper groups as it is about the fact that the characters have become terribly inconsistent at best and highly unlikable at worst. That is going to turn people off a show.

Craig, I agree with you. The first half of season 5 was great and Clana were together. But I think Clana is route of why the ratings dropped this season. Not Clana in and of itself, but how they had to debase all the characters to force them back together. I think if they'd done that with any of the ships it would have had the same results.

And someone in this thread (I can't remember who) did a comparison of the ratings with other shows. They didn't show any hard numbers, but basically the analysis was that even though most shows on all the networks had dropped Smallville was dropping at a faster rate. And Scry's graph shows that Promise was a turning point in the season. Maybe it was just a coincedence, but after that episode the rating plumeted and the show was never able to recover.

Well, something seems to have driven a way a lot of viewers from the show in the 2nd half of the season. Maybe it is as simple as a TV wide trend. Could be. But I do think its pretty understandable that people are trying to pinpoint the Why? I tend to think it was just the direction of the storyline overall, and yeah, that includes the heavy emphasis on Clexana. It just wasn't very compelling, and frankly annoying. And I do believe you can only lose sight of your main character to a certain point before viewers just get tired and realize the show is never going to get to the place they were hoping a show about a young Superman would get. After that, the viewers that hang on are the diehards, or 'shipper fans, or those that watch for a particular actor. But people watching for the overall show and storyline? Probably a bit thin on the ground. IMO

ETA: I was also a proponent of early S5 Clana. But they decided to break them up...again. And then they decided to put Lana with Lex. Then they decided to have Lana sleep with Lex, and marry Lex. I think the old adage "You can't go home again" just might apply here. You really can only do so much damage, and destroy so many bridges before people start saying "Clana? Again? Really? Even after she screwed Lex?"

I think that when all the characters integrities are compromised, logic is thrown out the window and about a year's worth of episodes are retconned viewers are going to be miffed.

I don't give a crap that she screwed Lex. I just can't stand the repetition. The secrets and lies. The angst. The blame. The faultless, perfect Lana. Early season 5 was good because we first saw a lack of angst (briefly) and that was different, so it was good. Then we saw that both of them were contributing to the destruction of the relationship, and that was good. Then it became faultless Lana and it's all Clark (and Lex's fault) and more of the same stuff we were sick of.

Also, early season 5 was the first time Lana was interesting to me. She was pursuing something on her own, eschewing help. 'Twas cool. Then she joined forces with Lex and she quit doing anything and left it all to him - blah and bland.

Early season 5 was great, IMO, because they thought it was their last. The character had been stagnating in their holding patterns, and then they finally started letting them move forward. There was mythos, but also growth and momentum and it was wonderful. Then they realized it wasn't going to be their last season. Momentum came to a screeching halt, everyone started chasing their tails again (running in circles) and the show went down hill, and has (IMO) plummeted this season. That's why I was hoping they'd go into S7 as their last - so we could get an entire season like early S5.

I really think Smallville would have been a much better show if it had been 5 or even 4 seasons long. I know I got tired of the lack of growth and started getting frustrated with Lex and Clark and the lack of moving forward on their journeys in the third season (maybe right at the beginning of the fourth for Clark - not sure, my memory is hazy). All the big three just seemed to keep doing the same things and having the same conversations over and over and never moved forward. At least, it seemed that way to me.

Then we got away from it for a while, but this season we got a repeat of Clana from seasons past. And general poor storytelling, too. The Zoners, like the witch storyline, just weren't compelling to me. Then we got Lana bouncing all over the place with her motivations and such. Lex and Lionel weren't as consistent as they could have been either. Two lightswitches for Lois. PodChloe. Jor-El's evil deeds swept under the rug. Very little Jimmy outside of Chimmy. Firstly I don't like Chimmy because I see PodChloe there and secondly, I just hate characters being brought in solely as love interests. I did like Jason (before his lightswitch), but never thought of him as having much depth, either. Hope they develop Jimmy solo some next season. Especially since he is a long-time Superman comic character. I really liked Ollie. Lollie was pretty good, too, most of the time. Hey, I like romance, but he was a heck of lot more than a love interest, and that made him a much better character. Now, if we can just get proactive Clark next season.

It's not about 'ships, it's about action versus soap. It's no accident that the most action-packed, soap-free episode scored the highest ratings and then the generic soapy wedding episode derailed the show. The 'ships are irrelevant as long as they don't get in the way of the action, ie. "Arrow" had Lexana scenes but viewers tuned in for GreenArrow/Action stuff. "Promise" had nothing on offer but stupid 'ship stuff and 600 000 viewers went "meh" and bailed.

And what will people say if/when the ratings STAY low next season?

People blame Clana because of the way it's usually written. Lana blames Clark, cuts his nuts and Clark just stands there with his crotch bleeding while shaking her booty at someone else. It ain't entertaining. Hell, I'll be surprised if she isn't shaking her butt at the mailman who saved her life and we'll get mailman/Lana/Clark triangles.

All joking aside, it's not the ships that cause the problems. It was one specific ship (Clexana), and the horrific damage that was done to make Lana a blameless victim / cunning mastermind / brave martyr.

We can talk about the ratings and what they mean, but Math 101 shows that after Promise, the ratings went down, and they went down hard. That episode made it clear that it really was All About Lana. Clark, Lex, Chloe, Lionel - they were all just supporting characters in the drama and angst that is the Lana Lang show. Continunity was shown to be meaningless, character development was spointless, and everything other than Lana looked like crap by the time it was finished. She will be loved, nothing is her fault, and to hell with a year's worth of episodes that show different. Well, a lot of folks disagreed, as the great Viewer Exodus of '07 made quite clear.

BadToad has made an excellent point more than once - the show can only move away from the main character and his journey for so long before they leave. Clark fans (and let's face it - on some level, we are all Clark fans, even if we just love to mock his BDA ways) will only take so much of the character being ignored or assassinated before they go away.

At this point, no signle relationship (besides Clex, or course) will be enough to get the ratings up. And KK coming back? After all of this? That might just be enough to drive off most of the non Sweet audience once and for all.

Even if Season 7 has a creative resurgence like early Season 5, I see the ratings as being just as low as most of Season 6 was, regardless of content. People are just not watching The CW.

Well, I'll disagree with that. Some of my favorite episodes of shows have little to no action. A good plot. A good arc. Character growth. Forward momentum. Those are the things that make good eps. Drama is good (soap is not), but mindless action isn't going to cut it for me. I can think of at least one show that had to have its action interlude every ep, even when it was completely unnecessary and actually took away from the story. Don't get me wrong - I like action. But there has to be more meat to an episode for it to me good.

ITA, Tzigone. Good action does not equate to being a good episode. There are a ton of episodes that I love that don't have a lot of action.

This is exactly why I'm no longer invested in the show. Sure, I will hang around till the bitter end, but my heart's not in it right now.

Partly because CW is a bad network. I do think you're right that it won't have a ratings bump even if it has a creative resurgence (which is questionable) but I also have to blame the show itself. Goughlar is partly responsible for making choices that keep people from being invested in the show with bad creative decisions. I just don't think it's right to relieve them of the responsibility. I don't think they should be treated like Lana.

If you hate them so much, why have you been watching for six seasons now? And again, why put the blame on them and them alone when there are hundreds of people responsible for the show's success (or not?)

I'd say the network itself is far more responsible for any of the show's failures than "Goughlar" ever have been. Those horrible green promos alone were reason enough not to watch more. And when a show does have the right elements, such as "Justice," people don't even know to watch anymore because it's on an inferior channel.

Frankly, I think the ratings are going down (more so than other shows, even on the same network) mostly because the quality of the show has gone down and people have gotten bored and left. And the show is a bit old to get new viewers.

I'd say they don't know to watch it because they've quit paying attention to the show because the show hasn't been good. If the show had the right elements, week in and week out, people would watch. Some dip in the ratings when the network changed was expected. But people who originally tuned in when it was on the CW quit tuning in - that to me says the show wasn't holding their interest (after factoring in seasonal changes, competition, etc.).

I like to start at the beginning (I pretty much don't start watching shows anymore unless I start with the pilot). This show started out good, and it's been good sometimes since. I keep watching because I hope for it to be good again. Frankly, even going in I was thinking of the sixth season as something I was watching so I'd know what was going on when we got to season 7 (which I was foolishly hoping would be like early S5). I've quit watching Smallville twice. Once at the end of S2 (wasn't really happy with the season as a whole and despised (though expected) the miscarriage and hated Clark willingly endangering millions of people). Got sucked back in by the promo with CR. Quit watching again at the end of S3 (mostly due to spoilers) but tuned back in for "Blank" because it seemed Chloe-heavy and I'm a sucker for amnesia episodes of just about any show. The FOS brought me in for S5, and the storylines kept me. S6, I mostly stuck with hoping for a better S7.


I just don't get this. I tune in to a show based on whether it looks/sounds entertaining or interesting - so a well put together a promo with clips from the episode is can help. I don't like (or dislike) any promos that are just the actors standing around looking pretty - they don't tell me anything about the show or characters. But I cannot fathom that someone already watching the show, entertained by the show, would quit watching because the promos were in an ugly color scheme. The previews, at least to me, do not seem to be any better or worse put together than previews from seasons past - I don't like the content, but then I haven't been liking the content of the show.

Any why absolve them of the blame when it seems they make the creative decisions that I despise and that have led me to skip eps and be generally frustrated with the show.

I think they could get a ratings lift if the start promoting Season 7 as the last season of Smallville early on the summer.
I think they could gain a lot of interest and the fans that left after the terrible downhill of S6 would come back remembering the greatness of S5.
I think even fans that had long go would come back to see how it ends.

So, possible false advertising, then? It might not be the last. I believe Al said once that they only need to know for certain around November so they can start gearing toward their final arc, so they're likely going to be pushing for S8 right up until the last minute.

I don't doubt that promoting S7 as the last season would garner interest, but if they do and they get renewed for their coveted S8? That will probably burn them in the end.

Because eventually the responsibility has to go somewhere. Give it to all of them then: DC, networks, Goughlar, writers, etc. but the badness is coming from somewhere. I used to buy stuff but I don't anymore. And frankly I'm rubbernecking. A few people on this board have blamed OCD, half-humorously. There's a point where you can't blame it on bad ads because way more people watched Justice than the finale. They know where the show is, people do know how to use a TV guide or look at the schedule in their newspaper. I just have to agree with Tzigone with this one. YOu can't occasionally trot out something good when people find alternatives that are more consistently good.

I watched every episode of Heroes live or if I really am busy, I catch up on nbc.com. I also try to catch SPN live, etc.

If it's not Goughlar's fault then shall we just go with the theory that the source material is wrong for a TV show?

I think that if they DO promote it as the last season, they have to be telling the truth and not pulling a 7th Heaven.

I just don't see how the network can be blamed for a mid/late season slump unless it changed it's channel and didn't notify anyone so milions of viewers couldn't find it. The shows numbers were down on average from S5 sure but overall pretty healthy up until Promise. Hell even Promise had a decent tune in but 1 week later several milion viewers didn't tune back in to see where it picked back up.

a) Clana
b) Lexana
c) Regressed!Clark
d) Cheerleader Chloe
e) Non-accountable Lana
f) Complete emasculation of Lex
D) ALL OF THE ABOVE

Why try to pin it on just one thing instead of it being possible that it was a really crappy episode no matter who or what you were a fan of and several million people said "fuck you Smallville" at the end of it? I know internet posters don't tend to get taken too seriously by networks but honestly this is prob and stats 101 along with basic cause and effect. You could transfer House to the home shopping network and as long as you announced it fans would keep tuning in to see the show regardless of the network it was on.

I never suggested they lying I really think SV had over stayed their welcome and should go on S7 and since must of the actors want out I find highly unlikely that they could go for and 8. I think once MR, KK, JG and AM start to comit to other projects they will give up that nonsense of S8. At least I hope.

The thing that I've brought up, that no one seems to want to provide numbers for, is I'm pretty sure THE ENTIRE CW LINE-UP went down in the months following "Promise." You can't blame that on Lana, Lexana, or anything like that.

Unless there's the argument that all of the CW's dramas made lame creative changes that drove people off. I know I didn't even want to bother with Veronica Mars near the end there.

I don't think many people here, myself included, would argue with that. :)


Well, we don't know that they do. KK's "departure" is still, right now, all rumour and no fact. The only actor who ever said they were leaving was MR and even he's waffled on that since.

What matters is that AlMiles want S8. They'll push for it and I highly doubt they'll concede defeat until the higher ups definitively say "No, wrap it up." which again, won't be until S7 is well underway.

The dramas went down. Didn't ANTM go up? And as a new show, Pussycat Dolls did very well.

But yes, the network did very badly as a whole.

I was reading an article today from a Candian tv critic guy who was writing about how the networks rated now that sweeps was over. The CW, according to him, came in last behind a Spanish language network that screened stuff like telenovellas.

That's not surprising. Univision has beaten some of the 4 major networks on occasion with certain programs. It hits the demo deliciously.

So if Univision can defeat CW in certain markets, you can't just chalk it up to channel obscurity.

Most people do attribute falling ratings of a show to the show itself. Most people say Lost lost its way and that's why they left which is why the producers promised to change content/writing. Whether that worked or not, I can't say though a few people on my flist really did enjoy the series finale.

I'd agree if we'd seen a gradual ratings slide - or if there had been a hiatus after "Promise" - but the show lost 600 000 viewers in one week. Comparatively, an episode of One Tree Hill lost 350 000 viewers - but that was going from a new episode to a repeat (and that show has never performed as well in reruns as SV does.)

As to other shows, Veronica Mars, bless its soul, never scored high ratings; Gilmore Girls has performed well this year and "Supernatural's" ratings are tied to Smallville's so it can't be used as a comparative case.


It may have been under-promoted, but a half million extra viewers did find their way to "Justice". But having coming up with the brilliant idea for "Justice", Al & Miles utterly failed to capitalize on it. An episode like that should be used to launch a plot arc to hook people for the rest of the season: catch viewers before sweeps and hang onto them. But the interesting plot arc (Clark and the JL vs. Lex & 33.1) was shoved offscreen in favour of a soapy triangle plot that could have been seen on any other show. It's true the network made some bad decisions - heavy advertising of "Promise" at the expense of other episodes - but Al & Miles are culpable in not recognizing that 'shipper groups are actually a very small demographic and catering to them would cost them general viewers, especially the young male demographic the CW was especially interested in attracting.


They're the bosses - It's their show. They get the big love when they score and the dings when they don't. DeKnight said the network was very hands-off, except for arranging the borrowing of wrestlers for "Static" and "Combat." Al & Miles simply made some bad decisions this year. For instance, "Wither" originally ended with a set-up for the Zoner arc; they took that out and put in the scene of Clark mopily bouncing a ball. A worse mistake was changing the ending to "Labryinth", taking out a Martian Manhunter scene and putting in a Lana scene. "Labryinth" is a worthy successor to "Justice" - cool action, cool guest star - up until that point, which makes it clear that soap opera is about to become ascendant again.


I agree - an ideal episode has more than just good action - but to hook in the casual viewers, the eps that do best in the ratings (Zod, Arrow, Fallout, Justice) tend to put action, DC characters and interesting guest stars to the forefront.

Also note that more people usually find their way to the finale even if they've been absent most of the season.

I also note that people blame Rob Thomas for VM's decline and not the network per se. People tongue-in-cheek call Kripke names when he makes Dean suffer. It's not ONLY this show where the exec producers get commented on, good or bad.

I'd have to disagree with this. You have to look at the fact that it's a new network, in some markets it wasn't even available at first. In my market our CW numbers have skyrocketed in the past three months. Whereas we used to pull a double dash in the primetime slot, we're now pulling a 3 share, probably because we didn't used to have a WB affiliate at all, and now everything is on one channel.

Not to mention I don't even trust Nielsen ratings anymore. With more and more households with DVRs, I think less and less people watch tv live anymore. In our house we watch a TON of television, none of it live.

I think the reason "reality" game shows like the Pussycat Dolls and ANTM still do terrifically live is because you basically have to watch them day-of, or results are spoiled for you. In my mind it's the equivalent of trying to watch the Superbowl the next day. But with a drama like Smallville, you can watch it in a vacuum, basically.

Yes, but if "Smallville" has millions of extra viewers who aren't watching it live, this is a serious issue for advertisers. How many people bother to sit through the commercials on a recorded show? I know I don't. So I think the Nielsons reflect the number that actually interests the advertisers, which is really what matters on commercial television.

This one's easy: because the show hasn't sucked for six seasons, it's sucked for one. The last one. Not that there haven't been bad moments for the show in the past (crystals and witches?), but season 6 became so consistently strong with "the suck" that it stands out among all others.


Because, form what I understand (which admittedly is limited, so correct me if I'm wrong here) they determine what we see unfolding on screen.


I guess we're affected by different things. Because while the puke green promos were quite horrible, that's has nothing to do with why I've lost interest in the show. And the ratings for Justice don't support your statement, because people DID tune in to watch that episode. As I said above, unless I'm mistaken of course, the networks didn't turn Smallville into a soap opera, the Goughlar did. And while it's perfectly reasonable to question whether or not that change was indeed responsible for the show's decline, I don't think it's a coincidence that at the VERY same time the ratings went down, there just so happened to be a HUGE (the biggest I've ever seen) wave of discontent permeating the online fandom - which IS a representative sample of the average viewer's mindset. If the attitude in the fandom was about the same as it was in the first half of the season, or last season, and the ratings went down, then you would could make a good argument that the ratings were more a result of people being somehow put off by the network. But that isn't the case; I don't see people expressing discontent with green promos, I see people tearing the show itself apart for what they see unfolding on screen. And that's a Goughlar issue, not a CW issue. So to me, it's clear that when the discontent of the fandom is at an all time high, and ratings are at an all time low, that those two trends are undeniably related.

While I agree with the statement that lots of people are watching/utilizing DVR I don't think that means you can toss out the Nielson's as an indicator of the shows watchability. If the show is a good one people will tune in live and will even make time in their personal schedules to do so.

Admittedly, I'm a bit clueless when it comes to the Nielsen ratings system. But even if people are watching recorded versions of their favorite programs, don't they still have to tune in to the live broadcast to get the recording? And if they happen to be a Nielsen home, wouldn't they still be counted in the ratings?

Oh and Resonance:


Big fat supercalifragilisticexpialidocious WORD to this statement.

After reading the second part of SDK's interview yesterday, I'm more inclined to believe that there is plenty of blame to go around. For instance, SDK spoke about the levels of control wielded by execs and DC. I'm not saying that every word out of his mouth is solid gold.

I think AlMiles bear the responsibility of ensuring that the basic integrity of the show, treatment of the characters, and quality of the stories remain intact and in line with their vision.

The writers bear responsibility for ensuring the same as AlMiles. I do not like it when writers divorce themselves from a work just because they didn't like the end result, which oftentimes is due to managerial decisions beyond their control - suck it up and deal - I have to. I understand the frustration on a very real level, but grow up SDK. It's business, albeit bad business sometimes.

Network executives and the like bear the responsibility for effectively marketing the show. I understand that there are financial and other constraints, however, if the executives determined that SV was a solid show that needed no to little promotion, then, shame on them. Fledgling network or not, the lack of consistent marketing and promotion has hurt the show at least temporarily.

All affect the ROI.


I think that's the first time I've seen that word spelled...or it's been a long time. Ha! Ha!

Just my opinion

Saying no one is watching the CW dismisses the choices the PTB made. I say this because if Heroes were on CW it would be watched, and the same can be said for all of the top 10 shows. I seem to note there has been a lack of free advertising, hype from TV Guide and such in the must see sections for the non event shows. I say this based mainly on not seeing the finale of Smallville listed on Yahoo TV's what to watch. The season started with Hype re Green Arrow and such and was given a chance. When the writing turned to just plain bad, people left.

I think good writing will carry a show and the time slot has lots of good shows that are consistently well written. My family watched UB and taunted me for watching Smallville. Hell, Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader came on the scene and pulled numbers. Smallville or the saga of Lana just did not appeal to the masses. And yes the promotions overall were not stellar, but you can only sell sizzle for so long before a person leaves to actually get a steak to eat. I'm blanking on the exact lines from the scene from An American President, where Micheal J Fox and Micheal Douglas have it out on people believing what they hear because there is no other message given. To tie it to this people stopped watching because the product stopped being worthy of their time, and there were other worthy activities.

Yes the same can be said for all of television, but a well delivered product will still pull numbers.

Sorry if I rambled.

The problem is this: shows need you to watch them in real-time because you can't escape the commercials. Once you alienate people to the point they record and decide to FF through the lame parts, they're also going to zip through the commercials. People just set the VCR and watch something else in RT. People will watch the ads if the show is good enough or at least just get a soda about half the time but if the show is terrible . . . the only way to make less irksome is by employing the magic of self-editing.

House gets major push by AI and promos galore but I think it REALLY denigrates Hugh Laurie by saying it's all promos, the network and scheduling because w/o him, I wouldn't watch. Content matters. Acting matters. Direction matters. Writing matters (though some of their writing decisions are wonky as heck).

DVRs are factored into Nielsen ratings.

I don't think you can blame that for rise of interest in reality fare and drops in ratings for dramas.

Weren't Gough/Millar pretty vocal supporters for a romantic triangle between Clark,Lana and Lex? I remember them being quoted as saying that they were just waiting for everyone to become legal so they can do it. And I don't know anyone either on line or off line who watch Smallville and like this plot. How can responsibility for that not fall upon Gough/Millar? And Steven DeKnight says in his interview that he actually had to talk the other writers out of having Clark impale Titan on a spike. If the writers think its ok to do that, wouldn't responsibility for that also fall on the shoulders of Gough/Millar? I do think the showrunners have to be held responsible for the direction of the story, and the way the characters behave.

The network would definitely shoulder the blame on advertising and marketing.

I think my opinion falls more on the side of believing that the ratings fell due to show content more then lack of advertising and marketing.

Re: Gilmore Girls...

Didn't that one fall drastically too? I remember seeing the numbers for the series finale being pretty bad for a series finale....

It sounds like OTH is the only drama that performed at all, and that at least was following Top Model which did well. I haven't seen the ratings so I wouldn't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if that fell in the post-March weeks also.

All producers are vocal supporters of whatever happens to be going on in the show right now. These are the same people who said "Clana is dead" after all.

The idea that ratings dropped because of the CW's color scheme or whatever is flawed. Anyone who was going to be turned off by that had been by the SV premiere. And, if they were SV fans before that, well, I don't know anyone who is going stop watching a show they like because they dislike a network's logo or color scheme.

Now, potential new viewers (folks who hadn't watched the WB or UPN, but might have been enticed to try a new network if the ad campaign really grabbed their attention) are another story. The CW had the chance to attract a bunch of new viewers with a really kick-ass advertising campaign coming out of the gate. Instead, they gave us something kind of laughable, hardly something that would make potential viewers think, "Hey, that looks cool. I should check out this new network." But while you can blame that for the new viewers SV didn't have going into the season, you can't really blame it for any long-time viewers SV lost later in the season.

You just can't explain the mass exodus after PROMISE, with Network problems

I'm sorry I can't buy the "it's not the content, it's the ad campaign" There is only so much advertising can do. Coke has a huge number of failed products they pimped like crazy. If content matters for GOOD shows, it seems wrong to dismiss that it matters for bad shows.

And I'll put it bluntly. Best advertisement is word of mouth but also most destructive advertisement is word of mouth and frankly what CAN people say about S7 SV: freak!Chloe, cockroach!Lana (presuming she survives unscathed) and puke!Clexana and more saint!Lana who ascends to be BBF of Clark even though she's been a troll for so much of the series. Seriously no thanks.

Not everyone hates freak!Chloe.

Though cockroach!Lana might not go over too well, as they've already given us death fakeouts for her before... and Clexana actually, yeah, has lost all fans of that triangle.

Yeah, but that also had quality issues -- Amy Sherman-Palladino and her husband left last season and the show had an unavoidable and very real dip in quality. It really didn't feel like the same show anymore. Which is too bad because in its prime it was fantastic.

I dont hate freakChloe, but what I hope will happen probably won't. See Clark was her personal bomb squad, but as she is a healer he doesn't have to worry about her getting hurt per se. So this should allow her to do more scoobying not less, and even make her more reckless, ala physcian heal thyself. I just hope Chole gets back to being an active, non attached to a computer investigator. Yet I fear it won't be written that way.