The clear, near zero, lack of interest in this show should be a clear signal to the Obama administration regarding their global warming agenda – nobody is buying it.
We wrote about this before, how reruns of the animated show Bob’s Burgers beat this multi-million dollar budget climate disaster epic.
It isn’t getting any better, like global warming for the last 17 years, the ratings of ‘Years of Living Dangerously’ is flat.
ShowBuzz writes about the Sunday, April 27th TV ratings:
YEARS OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY remained at a tiny 0.04 with 1 more episode to air.
Source: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/the-sked-sunday-ratings-29.html
And the final episode, which aired Sunday May 4th:
On Showtime, NURSE JACKIE and CALIFORNICATION were again at 0.2, but that’s somewhat misleading, since JACKIE was at 0.24 and CALIFORNICATION at 0.16. Both towered over the last episode of YEARS OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY, which wound up its run at a steady 0.04.
Source: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/the-sked-sunday-ratings-30.html
After the Obama Administration released their National Climate Assessment report this week, ‘Years of Living Dangerously’, which like the report was designed to scare the bejeezus out of people and spur action, it seems fitting that this TV show tanked. Nobody except the climate faithful are listening or watching. The show is now off the air on Sundays and will switch to Mondays. The last five episodes are scheduled to air on Monday nights, May 12, 19 and 26, and June 2 and 9 at 8:00pm ET/PT. on Showtime.
Now with all the hype, gloom and doom from the National Climate Assessment report this week, it will be interesting to see if it gains any viewership.
1957chev says:
May 8, 2014 at 6:41 pm
Years of Living Dangerously. Sounds exactly like the times when Liberals are in office!
LMAO chuckle ;>)
Climate Change has caused Harry Reid to go insane.
Now, how can I be against that ?
CORRECTION for my earlier comment.
“If they can’t get action this year they really should give up…..”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/08/global-warming-epic-years-of-living-dangerously-tanks-in-tv-ratings-series-ended/#comment-1632076
Don’t tell Years of Living Dangerously celebrity spokesperson, Harrison Ford, about Bob’s Burgers. He might want to hop in his plane to go get another cheeseburger,
http://blog.seattlepi.com/people/2010/02/24/harrison-ford-slammed-for-unnecessary-flights/
0.04?
So at what point is the number low enough that blog commenters peeking in on the show to make fun of it are actually Heisenberging the number?
And now moving to Monday at 8 their going up against Dancing with the stars for 2 or 3 weeks.
Indeed it has caused Harry to go round the bend, Neo. Watching ours or someone else decline mentally in front of TV cameras is sad. i suspect his staff has no idea what to do with him. Harry’s Koch mania is not helping his situation either.
1 – Which programming geniuses thought people want to pay for premium cable channels to watch this crap?
2 – Obviously, Hollywood’s values differ from the rest of America. Did they create this programming because they are out-of-touch or because they believe we’re clueless rubes and more propaganda is needed to get us to see the world the right way?
‘D’ All of the above.
It is surprising that with all that talent they could not have made a more engaging and entertaining series. I would watch it if it were any good. I started watching it but changed channels because it was boring. I have enjoyed other science fiction shows where I disagreed with the premise.
Now if they had only worked “Sharknado” into the series, it could have been a hit. Instead of a “documentary” based entirely upon a loose collection of facts interwoven into a fabric of pure speculation, they simply could have written a “Sharknado” episode with AGW being the cause of the phenomenon. Being premium cable, it could have featured gratuitous and copious amounts of sex and nudity (which is what people pay for in a premium channel, BTW) and been a ratings leader, at least among the key demographic of 12-82 year old males.
The best propaganda is when people don’t know it’s propaganda.
I predict Netflix including this in their comedy section soon.
“Years of Living Dangerously”? I was going to watch but instead it lost out to the wet paint that I watched until it dried to a lovely gray.
I’m sure you all understand what it’s liked to be faced with tough decisions. You only go around once in life and you have to grab for all the gusto you can get ;o)
I would have thought that the 50% faithful would have stuffed the viewership, but I gather even they couldn’t hack “Fears of Living” any better than the rest of us. That 0.04 rating was probably stuffed as it was.
It is when everyone is sleeping and indifferent that the worst government policies are implemented. Obama and his minions are now going to foist on the nation what they could not achieve through the legislative process. The fears that Alexander Hamilton had about Europe controlling parts of America (if we were to divide into several nations rather than one union with a strong national defense) is now happening as Obama imports the nonsense that Germany, Spain and other European countries have implemented that has accomplished nothing but a dramtic rise in the cost of energy.
That’s a brilliant idea – I would pay to see THAT.
Don’t associate Years of Living Dangerously with Game of Thrones – that would only result in an alarming prediction that CO2 causes fire breathing dragons….
The catastrophic man made global warming horror show has always been strictly Hollywood.
It has never been a documentary.
An Inconvenient Truth became a Disgraceful Self Serving Lie.
Six Degrees became Maybe One
Degree or Minus.
I watched it again recently for research purposes and found it hard to stop laughing.
Given the false gravely concerned looks into the camera and the other ridiculously alarmist footage this show must be reclassified as a comedy.
Why have so many otherwise interesting Nat Geo docos on the natural world for so long ended with a man made global warming horror lecture?
I decided to record and fast forward to the last ten minutes.
I had to wipe the entire show so many times I ceased watching them all.
Who funds these productions?
People would watch a show about garden-shovel makers in North Dakota, if there were interesting characters and good, solid writing. Heck, they watch documentaries about really icky jobs and trash collectors.
I suspect that YoLD suffered from neither of the two requirements. So the show folded? Its three viewers will probably be disappointed.
As far as the high imdb rating goes, if two people think it’s the greatest thing ever made, they’ll vote 5 stars, It seems to me (but I haven’t gone through the Common Core math series) that 4 ratings of 5,5,1,1 should average out to 3.0
“Just to break into our own developing echo chamber, please note that IMDb gives this pot of poop an 8.5 rating.”
From a whole 148 people, more than half of whom gave it a 10 (presumably because hardly anyone but a fanatic would watch it).
Meanwhile, ‘Game of Thrones’ has THREE THOUSAND TIMES as many votes. That gives you some idea of the relative popularity of the show..
I guess you have to write off Fox’s Cosmos as well as the latest episode made a strong statement regarding the science of AGW.
From a UK perspective, I hope the BBC don’t buy it now they have seen the US figures…
…but I bet they will.
You demonstrate H.L. Menkin”s statement that one can never go broke underestimating the taste of the average American. People that have and normally watch Showtime are watching the show. Having high ratings is not a good measure of the quality of a show. As with most movies and TV, the best shows don’t get the biggest audience.
What about Fox’s Cosmos? I think it is a very good presentation of basic science and kids should be able to follow it along with their parents. I suspect their ratings aren’t so good either, but over time, in reruns, lots of people will eventually see it. This past week on Cosmos, De Grasse did a very good presentation on why AGW is real and why we need to act.
Can someone please explain what 0,04 means? Is that percentage of those who can watch showtime, maybe 4% ?
This article says it wasn’t ended, just switched to a different day/time slot:
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/05/08/years-of-living-dangerously-on-showtime-shifts-to-monday-night-timeslot/261733/
“Why have so many otherwise interesting Nat Geo docos on the natural world for so long ended with a man made global warming horror lecture?”
National Geographic has always been in the tank for the latest anti-progress, anti-human tropes.
Sorry, but the ignorance on this subject is so profound it would be scary if I weren’t childless and old enough that when the weirdness of the present weather becomes much worse I will be gone and have no children to suffer from your ignorance (or stupidity, or both).