Ratings up 32 % in time slot

[Laohu]

https://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/cbs/278 ... -cast-news

NEWS
Alec Bojalad
Jan 25, 2019
Maybe that Magnum P.I. reboot wasn't such a bad idea after alll.

CBS wants more of the reimagining of the Tom Selleck classic and has officially ordered Magnum P.I. Season 2. The announcment came January 25 with CBS picking up second seasons of FBI and The Neighborhood as well.

“Each of these distinctive shows has made their mark in a variety of ways,” Kelly Kahl, President of CBS Entertainment said. “Our goals this season were to introduce new series that audiences are passionate about, add more strength to a winning schedule and create more inclusive programming.”


With Magnum P.I. Season 1 and soon-to-be Magnum P.I. Season 2 it's hard to argue that CBS hasn't achieved those particular goals. The Magnum P.I. reboot features a diverse cast that includes Jay Hernandez as the titular Thomas Magnum, Perdita Weeks as Juliett Higgins, Zachary Knighton as Rick Wright, Stephen Hill as Theodore "TC" Calvin, Tim Kang as Detective Gordon Katsumoto and Amy Hill as Kumu.

Audiences also seemed to be quite passionate about Magnum P.I. as well. CBS notes in its renewal announcement that Magnum P.I. has improved its Monday time period in the ratings by +32%. The people just love ex-Navy Seal Thomas Magnum and his garish Hawaiian shirts.

CBS's Magnum P.I. reboot follows Thomas Magnum, a Ferarri-loving, Detroit Tigers hat-wearing, private investigator in Hawaii. It largely follows the same concept as the 1980 original which launched Tom Selleck into the TV canon. The showwas developed by Peter M. Lenkov and Eric Guggenheim, who return as executive producers for Magnum P.I. Season 2 along with Justin Lin, John Davis, John Fox and Danielle Woodrow.

There's no word on a release date yet but with CBS's adherance to the typical fall TV schedule and Magnum P.I.'s strong 13-episode performance, another September debut seems like a strong possibilitiy. Stay tuned for updates.

[T.Q.]

LOL

Article dated week after the NFL AFC Championship Game [edited from Super Bowl].

I think they’re including the game [edited from Super Bowl] bounce when people just left their TVs on.

[KingKC]

LOL

Article dated week after Super Bowl.

I think they’re including the Super Bowl bounce when people just left their TVs on.

The Super Bowl was February 3, 2019. Something is amiss with the chart.

[T.Q.]

The Super Bowl was February 3, 2019. Something is amiss with the chart.

Sorry: AFC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME.

My post at the time:

Ep. 12 (Special Sunday night Episode):
Huge number.
12M viewers.
A lot more folks left their TVs on after the AFC Championship game than I thought they would.
Up 400% in demo.
Really curious to see if this CBS strategy translates to overall bump in viewers in the next few weeks.

[Laohu]

I am sorry I did not notice the date when I posted it . I did not think we knew the show had been renewed that far back ?

[ConchRepublican]

LOL

Article dated week after the NFL AFC Championship Game [edited from Super Bowl].

I think they’re including the game [edited from Super Bowl] bounce when people just left their TVs on.

Good work . . . those are some ugly numbers. The Ministry of Spin is working overtime.

[Laohu]

Here we go again with the Negative vibes . Spin where is the spin ? As far as I can tell it is accurate when written . Numbers were good enough to renew .

[T.Q.]

Here we go again with the Negative vibes . Spin where is the spin ? As far as I can tell it is accurate when written . Numbers were good enough to renew .

The spin is that the +45% was used to write an entire article the day after...

Ignores the -40% that occurred the very next week.

My view is it was misleading because they knew the numbers right after the NFL game would be an aberration.

[Laohu]

Me thinks things around here have become quite paranoid

[ConchRepublican]

Here we go again with the Negative vibes . Spin where is the spin ? As far as I can tell it is accurate when written . Numbers were good enough to renew .

The spin is that the +45% was used to write an entire article the day after...

Ignores the -40% that occurred the very next week.

My view is it was misleading because they knew the numbers right after the NFL game would be an aberration.

[T.Q.]

Me thinks things around here have become quite paranoid

Not really.

Just stating what I think is obvious.

Same with movies.

You see glowing reviews and articles that say they're great... yet they get 4 out of 10 rating from the public.

See The Last Jedi.

Critics 90%
Viewers 44%

Don't think Hollywood manipulates?

I do.

The timing of that article (with inflated post-NFL number) was suspicious.

[Chris109]

Me thinks things around here have become quite paranoid

Not really.

Just stating what I think is obvious.

Same with movies.

You see glowing reviews and articles that say they're great... yet they get 4 out of 10 rating from the public.

See The Last Jedi.

Critics 90%
Viewers 44%

Don't think Hollywood manipulates?

I do.

The timing of that article (with inflated post-NFL number) was suspicious.

[T.Q.]

Me thinks things around here have become quite paranoid

Not really.

Just stating what I think is obvious.

Same with movies.

You see glowing reviews and articles that say they're great... yet they get 4 out of 10 rating from the public.

See The Last Jedi.

Critics 90%
Viewers 44%

Don't think Hollywood manipulates?

I do.

The timing of that article (with inflated post-NFL number) was suspicious.

Sorry.

[KingKC]

Here we go again with the Negative vibes . Spin where is the spin ? As far as I can tell it is accurate when written . Numbers were good enough to renew .

The spin is that the +45% was used to write an entire article the day after...

Ignores the -40% that occurred the very next week.

My view is it was misleading because they knew the numbers right after the NFL game would be an aberration.

T.Q. - The -40% you refer to occurred the very next day on 1/21, before the article was posted, not the very next week. It makes the situation a little more egregious in my book.

[Laohu]

So if things are really as bad as you try to make it out to be and CBS is spending all kinds of effort manipulating everything to keep it on the air what is the reason in your opion for it? CBS has big bucks to spend developing shows as do all the networks . Next show up if one fails is the normal coarse of action. Canceling Magnum in it’s first year would have been easy for them as far as I can tell .
But they did not do that interestingly enough . Networks are motivated by profit which tells me The New Show made them money or they would have cancelled it .
You Know I am right