Boycotting Sci-Fi? NOT FROM HERE!!!!

[Mickie]

A Boycott?
Not from this site and I'll tell you why. We're called savefarscape.com and watchfarscape.com – not screwscifi.com. If you want to boycott SCIFI, go right ahead, nobody is stopping you. If you want to start a campaign website dedicated to boycotting SCIFI and their sponsors, again, go right ahead. But we're not going to advocate a boycott here because we're dedicated to finding a home for Farscape; we want people to watch Farscape. I don't care about SCIFI right now. I'm not going to watch the channel, personally. I've got some very bad feelings associated with them – I'd go so far as to say I loathe the SCIFI Channel. But I love Farscape more than I hate SCIFI and my concern and the concern of this website is Farscape. I want people to watch Farscape. I want new viewers to watch Farscape. I want to continue to grow the audience for Farscape because that makes Farscape a much more valuable franchise. SCIFI will be showing Farscape reruns – a boycott would be counter to our goal of getting people to watch Farscape. I don't care about the SCIFI Channel, I care about Farscape and I want good health and long life for the franchise and that means getting people to watch and being a positive force for the show.

--- Red

[Jul]

Don't think we don't know how :evil: :evil: :evil: you are at the SCI-FI Channel for cancelling Farscape. We know that anger.. know it really well. It's the first thing one thinks when they get mad at the networks. They're taking it from me, but I'm leaving so screw them. Anger is good, cause you can take it and use it. We're sublimating it for the greater good. We're taking it, and using to fuel each of our individual campaigns to save Farscape. and we want you, our fellow fan, to think through all the reasons that a boycott will not work to bring back Farscape and will in fact hurt Farscape and it's chances for getting it back on the air.

First of all, a boycott is done usually to get an individual or an entity to STOP doing something, not to START doing something. We want the SCI-FI Channel or another network to START airing new episodes of Farscape by paying the distribution rights to do so. They need the initiative to do that.

Getting in touch with advertisers and letting them know that the fans have seen their ads, buy their products, and are asking for their support for a show is a great way to do it. It's worked with Kentucky Fried Chicken so far. Telling the advertisers that you're going to boycott them is not a great way to do that, because for the most part, they buy just a certain number of ads on a network. They don't specify when stuff will air and when they contact SCI-FI, which they have, SCI-FI gives them the party line, "The ratings dropped so we cancelled it". So, then the advertiser comes back and says, "Well, the ratings dropped so they cancelled it." Your power in a boycott ends right there, because the advertiser doesn't want to advertise on shows with low ratings. However, if you're a consumer, and you have a receipt, and you send it in along with a note saying something to the affect of, "Hey, saw your commercial during Farscape on the SCI-FI Channel and I bought some of your product, please continue to support Farscape whether it's on the SCI-FI Channel or if it goes to another channel" They'll listen to you. Why?? Cause you don't sound like a crazy fan, first off, and secondly, cause you're a consumer. You're now their customer and they listen to their customers.


Furthermore, there are additional ramifications of boycotts. Farscape is going to be airing in reruns on the SCI-FI Channel. Once the SCI-FI Channel uses up all of the reruns it's contracted for with the Jim Henson Company, Henson gets back the rights to air Farscape in the U.S. They're going to go right out and syndicate it. The standard deal is two years or a specific number of reruns per ep which means if SCI FI doesn't use their rights to episodes, they'll expire in 2005. Now, what needs to happen is that Henson needs to be able to go out and sell Farscape. In order for that to happen, they need to show that there's a MARKET for Farscape. How is a market measured in television?? Ratings! The reruns need people to watch, so they get ratings, so Henson can syndicate them, make the popular, and start making all new Farscape eps.

How we as a community behave reflects to other networks. Don't think they're not watching, because they are. If you start boycotting the SCI-FI Channel now, you may be telling other networks that if they drop Farscape, you'll drop them. It does not elicit confidence and makes them wonder, why should I buy Farscape eps if they're just going to bail when it ends??? We need other networks in the case that SCI-FI doesn't pick up Farscape again.

and lastly, there's another aspect to this which is greater than SCI-FI - quality television. Farscape is one of the best examples of quality in television. That's why we love it so much! We need to support quality television that is out there. Not watching a channel cause there's nothing good to watch is totally different from not watching a channel to spite them for cancelling our favorite show. If you watch quality television, you support quality television cause it will get ratings. If you support it, the networks will make more quality television, rather than the cheapy dren they're airing now.

To echo Red: I don't care about the SCIFI Channel, I care about Farscape and I want good health and long life for the franchise and that means getting people to watch and being a positive force for the show.

-Jul

[bravelaker]

Sorry Im a bit confused from what i understand the only way they would know that we are watching is if we were one of those neilson families. Can anyone tell me how they would know that we were watching it at the times Scifi aired it.

[akimbo]

Aaah there's the rub. :)

You've got it right bravelaker, scifi wouldn't know whether we were or weren't watching if we weren't neilsen families. That is a large part of why an announced active boycott would do no good.

Welcome!

[S0m3B0dy]

I say we call the 3rd infantry in Iraq and get them to make a left and drive right over USA's main headquaters. Haha then maybe they would look up from there desks and realize there makeing ppl madd. Heh man I crack myself up.

For those of you that didn't get it I was talking about the USA tv network. In all seriousness there has to be some way to send these ppl a mesg. What if we simply boycotted a specific day or show? There has to be something we can do that doesn't break the law and works better than letter writieng campians. Lets face it these ppl understand only one launguage that is money if we cost them some they will take note VERY quickly.

I think my only problem with a boycot is it might make some show that is fiarly good look bad. Whatever we did would have to be well publized very specific in the date and time. Sigh no amtter what if ppl with neilson boxes aren't invloved its useless. Man I so hate the way these ppl do biusness.

What about havieng everyone call there cable provider and ask them to remove scifi channel? I mean isn't that how ppl get it to begin with. I would think if 500k ppl all called in the same week and asked to have scifi removed it would get there attention? Weather they removed the channel ro not isn't the point. They would report that to scifi wouldn't they?

[Jul]

S0m3B0dy,

Unfortunately, to reiterate what akimbo said, since ratings don't count if you're not a Nielsen family, they'd never know that you were boycotting the Sci-Fi Channel.

And when it comes to going to your cable provider and asking them to remove it from your selection of channels, first off, not all cable providers allow you to remove only one network.

Secondly, Farscape is airing in reruns on the Sci-Fi Channel 5 days a week and we need to grow the audience of Farscape in order to get more fans. Making sure to have the channel allows you the ability to do that. And more probably than not, the cable providers wouldn't bother reporting it back to Sci-Fi.

[S0m3B0dy]

If I understand this right though. If Sci-Fi plays the first 4 seasons into the dust and doesn't release the rights to them they bascialy kill the show. No1 else is going to pick up the 5th season and they aren't makeing it. So bascialy unless someone figures out a way to shove a hot pocker up scifi's ass this is all pointless. If I'm wrong plz correct me. I'm sortof new to this whole getting screwed over by network exec's thing.

[saska]

There are a few different stories out there regarding when and how SciFi will lose its exclusivity on Farscape rerun rights, but the consensus is that they *will* eventually lose the right to hold them hostage. A conventional-wisdom number is "2 years", but I know that our resident expert on these matters, MediaSavant, has posted some information that disputes the automatic 2 year rights period. I don't remember the exact location for the article, but I do know it referenced thefutoncritic.com...

This much is for sure, though - SciFi invested significant money in the production of Farscape, and their only means of recouping that money is through the fees paid for commercials aired during the show (now only reruns). They do not see a dime from merchandising or broadcast outside the US (that is where Henson gets *their* money). They also paid a penalty (no public disclosure of how much) to back out of the agreement for the 5th season. They are unlikely to release their rerun rights except for a better purchase price than they could collect through advertising revenue.

It would be hard, but not impossible, for a network to pick up Farscape without the reruns. It was done with Buffy, except that Buffy moved from one network to another, not from a cable channel to a network. Once the entire series is available on DVD, that might not be such a big deal, but I also think it's likely SciFi's exclusivity will have run out by the time all those DVDs are released.

I'm rambling now, it's late and I am supposed to be writing a Unix shell user's manual... must stop procrastinating...

Saska

[Jul]

Saska, it's two years for sure in this case according Rockne's interview in Starlog, I think :)

Keep in mind that it's two years, or a certain number of airings of a specific episode depending on how Sci-Fi schedules the episodes. If they air a lot of episodes of Farscape, that 2 year period gets shorter because they only bought a certain number of airings of each episode. They can't "play those seasons into the dust."

After that point, Henson will syndicate the show themselves. They haven't given up on the franchise. The people behind Farscape are still very committed to continuing the story. It's up to all of us to make sure that Farscape has a huge audience waiting for when that time comes. We hope and do believe that with the continued phenomenal support of Farscape fans world wide, Farscape will have a good future :D

[Stargate2077]

cough
cough

We still have another possiblity. USA Networks (which includes the Sci-Fi Channel) is being sold from Vivendi Universal's assests. Viacom is one of the interested parties in the network. If we are able to get the company interested in the show, when they buy the Sci-Fi Channel, they can restart negotiations with Henson. Different destinations...each with a way to continue Farscape.

[Jul]

That's one hope, which is why they're included in the lists to mail to if people have more time to write letters ;)

[asok]

The odds that there are a few neilson families on this board is good. We can hope that they will watch the show whenever it is on. That will help. Then not watch anything else on sci-fi. The rest of us can call our cable or dish providers and ask them to drop sci-fi from our channels. Maybe that way if sci-fi sees that people are not wanting watch their channel.

Also, buy anything that is Farscape related. Remember to buy items that can be tracked like books, video games, VHS, DVD, etc. So no ebay or anything used. :( It will hard not to do that.

Just my 2 cents.

Asok

[akimbo]

Welcome asok!

I still think anyone who has a neilsen's box should watch whatever they really want to watch - as long as they watch the Farscape reruns too :)

I don't think if they're on this board and love Farscape that they'll need much more than a gentle reminder to watch the reruns. :)
Heck I'll come watch it for them.

[waltersgirl]

akimbo :lol:lol:lol


asok,

reruns are the key that we can recruit new fans with. talk it up, have viewing parties at your home. once they share the wonders we've seen, they'll be hooked like the rest of us poor slobs. :spin:

[waltersgirl]

Why Savefarscape.com does not endorse a boycott


We get emails/questions frequently from people who want us to propose a boycott. Usually the question is asked politely or the statement is made reasonably, but more frequently than I'd like, the emails are rude or downright abusive. I'm with the campaign to save the show and I don't want to have anything to do with fans like that, I can only imagine what a network thinks.
I just want to take a moment to clarify and let everybody know the reasons why savefarscape.com doesn't support a boycott.

We have, from day one, tried very hard to conduct ourselves in a positive, professional manner. The result of that is that we are being treated with respect and we are being listened to. They (networks, tptb, media) know who we are and they're not afraid to talk to us or about us. If we begin to act out angrily, with threats and venomous letters and calls, that ruins all that we've worked so hard for. Those people won't want to have anything to do with us. Why would they?

Our campaign is a positive campaign because we want a positive outcome. We want somebody to pick up Farscape. To achieve a positive outcome we must use positive actions. Positive actions include thanking Henson for Farscape and asking them to continue to support the show, thanking the advertisers for advertising during Farscape and asking them to continue their support, contacting new networks and showing them just how valuable Farscape and its fans can be to them, and sending politely worded letters to the SCI FI Channel expressing your disappointment over their decision and encouraging them to show the reruns at a reasonable hour.

A boycott is a negative action – useful if you want to try and stop a behavior, not particularly useful if you want to encourage a behavior. If this was a campaign trying to achieve a negative outcome – for example, if we were trying to get a show off of the air – than a boycott is a viable and effective tactic. However, we cannot use negative tactics to try and influence a positive outcome. It just won't work the way we want it to.

This campaign is about trying to find a home for Farscape so that that story can be told, in its entirety, as it was meant to be told. This campaign is not about threatening people, advertisers, and networks. We want to continue to be seen as a positive force, and because we are now attached, in people's minds, to Farscape itself, it will serve us better and the franchise better if we continue to be as positive as possible. I'm not talking pie-eyed, happy, fluffy, bunny thoughts, but I am talking about positive forward moving actions. The networks now know that if they get Farscape they get us. How do we want to look to those networks? We want to look like a powerful, valuable, loyal, positive audience; we don't want to look like an angry mob.

Another important point to make, is that for the next two years the SCI FI Channel has the rights to Farscape. They will be airing Farscape, from the beginning, and this is a tremendous opportunity for new viewers to catch up and a great chance to get potential fans hooked. A boycott would be counter to our goals of expanding the fan base and getting people to Watch Farscape.

I'm not telling you that you must watch the SCI FI Channel. I, myself, cannot stand to watch the channel any longer. I've turned it off and I'll likely only be back for Farscape reruns. That's my decision as a consumer. The SCI FI Channel has lost my business and it may very well have lost yours, too.

This is a website devoted to saving Farscape; it is not a website devoted to destroying the SCI FI Channel and their advertisers. It is up to you to decide which you'd rather do. My advice is, focus on Farscape first; deal with the SCI FI Channel later.

Thank you,
Red

[BlackJade]

Help! I'm new and can't figure out how this complex bb/chat room (????) works!!! I bumbled over here from the Scifi BB's because I joined due to Tremors (Please don't throw things!!) and became interested in Farscape due to the furor on Tremors BB from angry FS fans. I'm having a very difficult:mad: :mad: :eek: :eek: :mad: time figuring out this system. Can anyone help?? (That is, if I succeed in finding this (?)post(?) again?????) thanks...HELP

[jadeshand]

Hi BlackJade,

This BB is separated into different section titles so there isn't just a jumble of unrelated topics all on one thread.

If you are interested in working on the campaign to save farscape, you need to visit the Campaign Strategy board which is the most heavily trafficced board here.

If you want to talk about Farscape, go to the Farscape Discussion boards.

If you are new to Farscape, there is a board of that name were you can read the Farscape primer and ask questions.

Hope this helps.

[waltersgirl]

BlackJade,

everyone is welcome here, no matter what you're a fan of. it was cool of you to take the time to check us out. ;)

[BlackJade]

and I agree with the point made that we should NOT boycott Scifi. At least not when it's showing FS. (And this from a Tremors fan!) I am intrigued by the discussion of the Nielson ratings; I have distrusted that ratings system ever since it provided ammo for the cancellation of the original "Star Trek". I Like the IDEA of sending LOTS OF LETTERS to the various executives involved; and I agree that the letters should be respectful. (Snail mail requires more effort to deal with than e-mail, which can be deleted with the push of a button.) The idea is to get FarScape back on the air, not anger people who may have future control over the fate of the show. With that in mind, I have skimmed through several of the :eek: ??Threads?? looking for more statistics on FarScape, such as the number of awards it's won, the positive feedback from critics, and perhaps number of (:mad: ) fans who are LOUDLY voicing their discontent with the situation. I've reviewed a few of the sample fan letters, but I would like to put more statistics/facts :zzz: into my letter. I've picked up quite a few from various threads; can anyone direct me to sites with more facts? One reason I desire this is that many posts on the SciFi BB's are blaming Bonnie Hammer (I jumped on the bandwagon a few times myself) and then I learn that she's not the one who dropped the ax....Plus, the more (snail mail) letters they recieve, the more they'll realize that the Nielsen ratings just may have been a LITTLE :eh: inaccurate in their figures...
Tremors/FS fan (And you thought we didn't exist!)

[Stargate2077]

Read the threads here...especially mine. They explain a lot about the behind the scenes of the two companies (Vivendi Universal and EM.TV) before Farscape was cancelled. Hopefully that will explain alot. If you have any questions, just make a post and we will try to answer it as soon as possible. By the way, welcome to the board.

[Selena]

Seems to me that this 'Community' is adopting a trend towards becoming a venue for picking on members with differing opinions. Whatever happened to us being able to be a diverse group who loves Farscape and wants to fight for our show and be free to express how we wish to carry on that fight?

Personally, I've received PMs from members who have been downright abusive and nasty because their opinion is different to mine. Some members post nicely written, almost gentle, opinions on the public board but get nasty in private. The passive aggressive nature of some of these people is most disturbing and does nothing but alienate members who have been around since this site was formed. Most of us that have been at SaveFarscape.com since the beginning, have been extensively involved with the SaveFarscape campaign and expended considerable resources and efforts to fight for Farscape. Other members have been publicly castigated and humiliated for their views about the campaign and this has seemingly been sanctioned by the FWA. I've noticed that some members have virtually 'disappeared' from the threads ... have they left because they can no longer take the nasty comments that have been leveled at them? Funny, I thought every member was important and valued! But it’s getting to a point where some members are more valued than others.

If what Akimbo says is true, then Sci-Fi only knows the non-Nielsen’s are not watching if they write to them. Why then are we not encouraged to do this? If every letter counts then surely those of us who are only watching one or two shows need to be writing to Sci-Fi about it or have we been misled in that fact? If we're not watching from personal choice or only watching certain programs then what is wrong with writing to Sci-Fi every week and telling them exactly what our viewing habits are? And what is wrong with combining that information with a note saying that we miss our favorite show since it was cancelled and adding our demographics and that we are NOT NIELSEN? I'm happy spend an extra 45 cents to send it 'Receipt Verification' ... perhaps others would be too.

That said it just leaves one question ... are those of us who don't share SaveFarscape's FWA's opinion about every intimate detail of the SaveFarscape campaign, no longer welcome or needed for the campaign or allowed to freely share our views and ideas?

[Red]

Selena, I've told you that this site won't support a boycott. If you want to have a differing opinion on that go right ahead. People have asked us repeatedly to promote a boycott and I have had to reply repeatedly that we will not. I've posted the reasons that this website won't support a boycott. If you want to boycott go right ahead. But this site won't support it because for this site we feel that boycotting is a tactic that is contrary to what we, as a website, have been doing all along.

If you'd like to point out these nasty comments and abusive threads, I'd love to take a look at them. However, if some people cannot carry on discussions with people who have views contrary to their own, and in response they wish to leave, then there's really nothing that we can do. Sad as we are to see them go. Because good discussion can lead to creative solutions to problems.

If what Akimbo says is true, then Sci-Fi only knows the non-Nielsen’s are not watching if they write to them. Why then are we not encouraged to do this?
I don't know. Why aren't you doing that? We post suggestions on letter writing that are in line with our overall strategy, however they are just that -- suggestions. If you wish to write letters of different substance nobody is stopping you. Our only overall request has been that whatever the content, be polite.

If we're not watching from personal choice or only watching certain programs then what is wrong with writing to Sci-Fi every week and telling them exactly what our viewing habits are?
I personally don't see anything wrong with that. Why haven't you done it?

And what is wrong with combining that information with a note saying that we miss our favorite show since it was cancelled and adding our demographics and that we are NOT NIELSEN? I'm happy spend an extra 45 cents to send it 'Receipt Verification' ... perhaps others would be too.

Again, nothing wrong with that that I can see. In fact that last bit I'm pretty sure we did suggest. or rather something like it. (the I Am Not Nielsen bit, I mean. In fact Maayan made some groovy stationary for it back when the show came back on in January). So why don't you do it?

That said it just leaves one question ... are those of us who don't share SaveFarscape's FWA's opinion about every intimate detail of the SaveFarscape campaign, no longer welcome or needed for the campaign or allowed to freely share our views and ideas?
No, everybody who can behave in a civil manner is welcome. Unless you mean that since the FWA may not conform to your personal wishes you're feeling ostracized, and are therefore disgruntled and ultimately feeling unwelcome. In which case I can only say that it is impossible to make everybody happy all of the time.

And about the rude and abusive PMs. Yes, I've certainly received a number of extraordinarily rude and uncalled for missives from people who don't disagree with this site's stance on the boycott issue (got one yesterday in fact). It's odd how some people expect that I (or anybody - speaking of the general "I" here) should treat their opinions with respect but they're not willing to do the same for me when I disagree with them. And interesting that they will personally seek me out and launch unprovoked attacks upon my character simply because I don't fall in line with them. It's just not fair, no matter which side of an issue you're on. But again, that goes back to not being able to keep everybody happy no matter what you do.

[Selena]

RED it seems you've totally missed the point ... I was talking about those who express certain contrary opinions and are reprimanded for them and I was attempting to speak up for them!

I consider EVERY member of SaveFarscape as valuable and necessary to getting Farscape back on the air. I also see them as having the right to express their views without prejudice ... something that some members here do not like or want.

And for your info, I personally, HAVE written ALL those letters (you question me not doing) to Sci-Fi and continue to do so every week. The general tone of threads at this site however, is that if one chooses not to watch Sci-Fi or to selectively watch only certain shows then they need to be doing that without comment to the network. I have seen nothing encouraging those who choose not to watch to continue to write to Sci-Fi that they are not watching and wonder why this is so?

Finally to my knowledge, NO-ONE has ASKED SaveFarscape to sanction a boycott. I certainly have not! I have however tried to be objective and see others point's of view - which is not necessarily in line with mine. The mere mention of the word boycott however, is enough to cause a lot of hostility at this site and dissuade any constructive discussion and I was speaking to that point.

[Red]

I was talking about those who express certain contrary opinions and are reprimanded for them and I was attempting to speak up for them!

And I asked you to provide links to those posts so that I could get a better idea of exactly what you're referring to.

I consider EVERY member of SaveFarscape as valuable and necessary to getting Farscape back on the air. I also see them as having the right to express their views without prejudice ... something that some members here do not like or want.

Again, I am asking quite sincerely here, please provide me with example posts so that I can have a better idea of what exactly you're talking about.

And for your info, I personally, HAVE written ALL those letters (you question me not doing) to Sci-Fi and continue to do so every week.
I didn't question you not doing them, you said "Why aren't we doing that?" So I asked you "why aren't you doing that?" And you have just replied that you are doing that so bully for you. :aok:

the general tone of threads at this site however, is that if one chooses not to watch Sci-Fi or to selectively watch only certain shows then they need to be doing that without comment to the network.
Err. Okay. I don't think we've ever told people exactly what they should or should not write in their letters (with the only request we've made being that whatever the content, people should try and be polite), but if you'd like to provide me with examples of SF.com staffers contributing to that sort of environment then I will gladly take those examples under advisement. And by examples I mean beyond our already stated postion on the issue of the web site not promoting a boycott. Of course since that's just the position of the website and the website's tactics and is thus reflected in recommendations and suggestions that the website may make, what individuals choose to do is, and has always been, up to them, and as a result the recommendations of the site may not conform to what an individual chooses to do, in which case that's hardly something we have any control over other than simply stating the website's position on that specific matter.

Finally to my knowledge, NO-ONE has ASKED SaveFarscape to sanction a boycott.
And now I am able to tell you that many, many, many people have asked SaveFarscape to sanction a boycott.

I have however tried to be objective and see others point's of view - which is not necessarily in line with mine.
As have I and as have all the staffers at SF.com

The mere mention of the word boycott however, is enough to cause a lot of hostility at this site and dissuade any constructive discussion and I was speaking to that point.
Unfortunately discussion of a boycott is always the same discussion and never actually seems to evolve as discussion into something that could be a positive and creative solution to the problem.
Have tempers flared with the talk of boycott? Yes. But that happens when people don't agree. Has my temper flared? Yes. Forgive me. But any hostility that I have seen has simply come from a clash of two points of view. From both sides. Which is bound to happen because, as you know, you can't make everybody happy all of the time.
Again, if you would like to give me some further examples of this hostility on the boards, that would be wonderful. Many times, what I have seen is that when new people, who are not familiar with the policies of this website have suggested that a boycott might be effective, others who are familiar with the policies of the site have come on and for the most part, from what I've seen, politely informed these people of the site's policies regarding the fact that we won't endorse a boycott in any way.
Admittedly I don't have the time to read all posts on this board and quite frequently we do rely on posters being adult enough to handle situations by themselves and to behave in a civil manner. That doesn't always happen but there's only so much I can do about that.

[Shipscat]

Hey, Selena!

I've been telling Scifi I don't watch anymore in every letter and almost every post on Scifi.com. That doesn't mean I support an organized boycott, because I think strategically it's a bad move.

To me it's really helpful in my mind to separate out my individual feelings or rumblings of conscience from what I think the group should do. I think it's perfectly okay for me to remind Scifi that they lost a viewer, but if we announced an organized boycott and their ratings were fine, which they would be because if we were able to influence the ratings Farscape's would have been better, then a boycott would be worse than useless, it would be harmful.

The problem arises because there are people who believe that a boycott *is* the only effective way, and the only way we can weild any power over Scifi. They get very emotional about it because they believe that we are throwing away the only chance we have. And then, of course, people who don't believe in a boycott get very touchy because they don't like being accused of being 'too nice' and throwing away our only chance.

So, as you can see, it's a very emotional issue, not that that excuses any mean posts or pm's. But a few messages from individuals does not mean that the website as a whole condones bashing people with different ideas. If it did, those people you mentioned wouldn't act one way on public and another in private.

[Selena]

Very well put Shipscat!

[Stargate2077]

Selena: Basically, the campaign as an entity can not support a boycott because it creates a bad image for the campaign as a whole. That is the short answer to your question.

[BlackJade]

extensive and extremely involved description of the dealings of high finance that affected FarScape (and loved it! Didn't understand all of it, but loved it!). Hilarious about the deal sold to the first French CEO, the deal worth 8 bil sold for 11 bil. Sounds like (?) Diller was quite a horse trader...

About Selena's comments; as a new person, (having been subjected to spam in various situations in the past) I chose to block all PM's when I came on board, as I unfortunately had to block most e-mails on my personal handle...received too much porn and profane spam when I left it open. With regards to the rude PM's mentioned, it is most unfortunate that such immaturity rises to the surface when emotions run high.

Having said that, I want to whine about a comment I noticed in one of the sample letters. I wish Patrick G., (and if there are others, stop it!) would stop perpetuating certain myths about the typical science fiction audience. He states, "Learn your core audience(s)!! For crying out loud, its males age 12 to 40 who love horror," (maybe he's right about that specific category...) "science fiction," (I've suspected the inaccuracy of that since the 1950's when I, as a very young female, first picked up a 'Galaxy Reader' and became hooked on science fiction) "animation, blood and guts, action, excitement."

Besides the obvious male bias in such a statement, this sort of thinking hurts the FarScape cause. As a new fan, I would assume that implying that FarScape has the widest viewership possible would help bring it back on the air. Implying a narrow viewership seems to have been the sort of thinking that took it off the air in the first place.

So far the only letter I've sent to Michael Jackson has been "HELP! Please save FarScape! signed a Newly Dedicated fan". No paragon of eloquence, but at the time it was the only statement I felt confident in making. But I want to do more.

With that in mind, could you (the collective you, all are invited, especially since PM's are blocked!) please review the following sample letter that I would like to send? Thanks!

"Dear (Michael Jackson, Bonnie Hammer, etc.),
I am a fan of the show, FarScape. I am terribly disappointed to learn that you have taken this award winning show off of the air. Having seen the other shows available on the SciFi channel, I find that I am drawn to FarScape every time, whereas most of the other series that you offer (except for StarGate) do not consistently pull me in as a viewer.

Would you please reconsider your decision? There is a large fan base for FarScape; most of these people were deeply loyal to your SciFi channel based on your decision to run the series through its fourth year.

Needless to say, happy fans make for higher ratings, but right now the tone amongst the fans of FarScape/SciFi is one of shocked disbelief. Since I have read a lineup of projected new shows for SciFi, (Dead Lawyers???) I am very puzzled at your rejection of a proven winner in lieu of such uncertain newcomers. Perhaps an aggresive advertising campaign such as the one you ran for "Tremors" would have assisted in raising FarScape's ratings back up to its typical high level.

Please reconsider your decision. I know that you are trying to maintain a standard of excellence in science fiction entertainment. Sometimes a decision is made with the best of intentions. But I feel that your SciFi channel is made poorer by the loss of FarScape. Please bring the fourth season back to life, and consider the possibility of a fifth season.

Thank you,

(my name)
Loyal fan


Yeah, I know. SciFi is not loyal to the FS fans, and certainly not aiming for excellence in science fiction entertainment. But it doesn't hurt to schmoooze, keeping in mind that we are dealing with top executives that dwell in the rarified (and very ethereal-especially between the ears!) atmosphere of upper-class white collar business. (YUK!)

Comments?
ThX!

"I'm not soft and weak. I'm soft."

[Stargate2077]

Having said that, I want to whine about a comment I noticed in one of the sample letters. I wish Patrick G., (and if there are others, stop it!) would stop perpetuating certain myths about the typical science fiction audience. He states, "Learn your core audience(s)!! For crying out loud, its males age 12 to 40 who love horror," (maybe he's right about that specific category...) "science fiction," (I've suspected the inaccuracy of that since the 1950's when I, as a very young female, first picked up a 'Galaxy Reader' and became hooked on science fiction) "animation, blood and guts, action, excitement."


I haven't read that thread, but based on what you have quoted, you are absolutely right. Farscape's audience is very diverse spanning gender, race, nationality, income level, and occupation. The whole reason behind the Brascape project was to show that Farscape has that female audience that Bonnie Hammer is after.

[BlackJade]

is one of the sample letters posted under "Quick Start">"Campaign Information">"Fan Letters and Samples". I think it's the site: campaign/letters.php?letter=26. No problem with the rest of the content, just the narrow viewpoint of science fiction viewership. Hasn't this guy ever heard of Anne McCaffrey??? 'Nuff whining.

I hope my letter can measure up to his. Below I submit another letter, this one directed to the cast and crew of FarScape. I submit these letters for review before sending them because I am VERY new, and feel I need some feedback regarding content. For example, in the previous post, should I mention StarGate? Or focus strictly on FS? Also, I'm a bit confused about the season running when SciFi chose to cancel FS. Was it the fourth season? Should I comment on premature cancellation of the fourth season, or fifth?

Anyway, here's my version of a letter to the cast and crew...

Dear Cast and Crew of FarScape,

Thank you, thank you, thank you for having the farsightedness and wisdom to come up with such an original concept! Thank you for such excellent character development! Thank you, actresses and actors, for cheerfully doing everything necessary (like getting up VERY EARLY in the morning to be made up for your specific roles!) to create a seamless, flawless performance in every episode!

Thank you for sticking to your principles, even when under pressure to compromise! Be assured that we, the massed armies of FarScape fans, will bombard all personages neccessary with legions of letters! We want you back on the air! (Or maybe even a movie??) Preferably, both!

I am sending letters off to the executives at SciFi and its parent company as often as possible. I am making certain that the tone of my letters is polite, and I am determined to hold onto the hope of a renewed contract.

We are behind you, 100%!

Sincerely,


(my name)
A Devoted Fan



As before, I would appreciate comments, critique....from all.
ThX!

"I'm not soft and weak! I'm soft."
Zhaaana (?)

[StarsGoBlue]

Just wanted to say howdy, and it was great to meet you on the Dom and now to have you here!

We appreciate everyone who's working so hard to save Farscape.

That's all, look forward to seeing more of you!

*****StarsGoBlue :)

[crazyPJ]

I just got here, so this may have been said before but here it is again I know actors have to eat but why did anyone ever allow this crap to be made? I really, really tried to watch Tremors, there is no hope for it, its worse than the endless black and white re-runs of Twilight Zone. Does it have any redeeming features? I think not. Someone at Sci-Fi should get their head out of their a.... At least there are still the re-runs of Farscape, and they use 'plausible impossible' scenarios. I think scare tactics is about as funny as terminal cancer, as soon as someone gets a real good lawsuit going it can return to the pit of hell from where it escaped.

[Shipscat]

Ditto there on Scare tactics. Well said.

[Astro599-SpaceCoyote]

Originally posted by Mickie
A Boycott?
Not from this site and I'll tell you why. We're called savefarscape.com and watchfarscape.com – not screwscifi.com. If you want to boycott SCIFI, go right ahead, nobody is stopping you. If you want to start a campaign website dedicated to boycotting SCIFI and their sponsors, again, go right ahead. But we're not going to advocate a boycott here because we're dedicated to finding a home for Farscape; we want people to watch Farscape. I don't care about SCIFI right now. I'm not going to watch the channel, personally. I've got some very bad feelings associated with them – I'd go so far as to say I loathe the SCIFI Channel. But I love Farscape more than I hate SCIFI and my concern and the concern of this website is Farscape. I want people to watch Farscape. I want new viewers to watch Farscape. I want to continue to grow the audience for Farscape because that makes Farscape a much more valuable franchise. SCIFI will be showing Farscape reruns – a boycott would be counter to our goal of getting people to watch Farscape. I don't care about the SCIFI Channel, I care about Farscape and I want good health and long life for the franchise and that means getting people to watch and being a positive force for the show.

--- Red

I have no intention of boycotting sci-fi, but I do have an idea for their next tv original:

a sci-fi original-- when Farscape fans attack.


and please don't take that seriously-- it was a joke.

[XweAponX]

Replace Farscape with Tremors? Replace Tracker (even though that sucked too but beside the point) with Cleopatra 2525?

E-YECCH! And I though I was fahrbot!

And Scare Tactics don't even get me started (vomit, barf)

So: Who thinks, Sci Fi is being FAIR to Farscape by putting RERUNS on at 1:00 AM or 5:00 AM? Raise your hand? What are they afraid of eh?

Here is the story: Sci Fi wanted to put all their money into Stargate Ecch-G-1 (Another vomitable Quinn Martin production)

So? No room for Farscape.

They did the same thing to LEXX but they at least had the decency to let LEXX go off the air with a decent series finale.

However, I would not boycott Sci Fi... I was at least until last friday enjoying reruns of "Roswell"... Which happens to have had my interest, MORE than any of Sci Fi's original shows or moovies. But then in their wisdom, today I noticed that they replaced the timeslot with Star Dreck TOS. Really! Farscape could have been put in that slot. (6:00 PM)

Sci Fi has gone blotto!





:finger: :squish: :squish: :squish: :squish: :squish: :snore:

:)

[~springrain]

Originally posted by Shipscat
I've been telling Scifi I don't watch anymore in every letter and almost every post on Scifi.com. That doesn't mean I support an organized boycott, because I think strategically it's a bad move.

I think it's perfectly okay for me to remind Scifi that they lost a viewer, but if we announced an organized boycott and their ratings were fine, which they would be because if we were able to influence the ratings Farscape's would have been better, then a boycott would be worse than useless, it would be harmful.

Hello Shipscat and all *smile*

new to the board... but not new to the campaign... i really agree with Shipscat here. Neilson ratings are so subjective... it would be nearly impossible to know whether or not an organized Boycott would effect Scifi channels ratings... and likely as not, it would backfire and become something negative and harmful

i feel completely justified in letting Scifi channel know how disappointment i am... and that i personally have "lost heart" in the channel... but an organized boycott i think would backfire and undo many of the positive things that the SaveFarscape campaign has done thus far..

[crazyPJ]

I would not advocate boycotting Sci-Fi, I would however like to point out that there just isnt anything that interests me on Sci-Fi Friday nights. I WORK until midnight and would actually prefer Farscape to move to 1.00pm eastern time so I could see all of the reruns (and the episodes I've missed through working) I have to admit that I quite like Stargate SG1, pure escapist nonsense, 'Oh, look we saved the world again'. I still find Tremors just nonsense and scare tactics is plain stupid, I dont find anything funny in it. I dont watch either of them, in fact I dont watch Sci-Fi at all on Fridays.:(

[XweAponX]

There is just not anything that is worth watching on scifi AT ALL, it is all vomitable dren. If SG-1 had better screenplay writers, maybe... A good show is not always visual effects, it is good writing, and good directing.

Farscape, being produced by Richard Manning, who was half of the production team that kicked Star Trek: TNG in the rear in it's second season, kept Farscape fast-paced and interesting.

I was mentioning Roswell: Well, Jonathan Frakes was one of the producers of that show: And he is a very good director, as a producer that show actually moved at a decent pace (even though it was directed at the testosterone-driven WB crowd, but, not bad)

The last actual "original" thing Sci-Fi did that was halfway decent was Children of Dune- I thought it was much better than the first Dune thing they did, and that one was not bad really. I just wish they had used Alice Krige in the first one, but the woman who played Jessica in the first one was not bad either.


So, let's get Viacom interested in buying out this joint!



:smokin:

[~springrain]

Originally posted by XweAponX
There is just not anything that is worth watching on scifi AT ALL, it is all vomitable dren.

sadly, i could not agree more

[XweAponX]

Question answered, THAT's where V/U wanted to put ALL the money. So, V/U can suck on my eema for awhile until all the dren is removed! :) :) :) :finger: :finger:

It really pisses me off, cos, although Ecch G 1 was SLIGHTLY more interesting than it had been, Farscape was a MUCH better show.

Frell V/U with a spoon!

:finger: :finger: :finger: :finger: :finger: :mad:

[vhsiv]

Originally posted by XweAponX
If SG-1 had better screenplay writers, maybe... A good show is not always visual effects, it is good writing, and good directing. I couldn't agree more - I just snagged a bunch of 'Blake's 7' tapes off of Ebay. While the production values leave a bit to be desired - we're talking 1981 AND the BBC here, folks - it's actually a very good show. (Intelligent, thought provoking, full of interesting characters and character development.)

The writing and intelligence of the show more than makes up for its shortcomings. It's better than a dozen other [unnamed] US-produced shows that have had more than $1 mil to spend per episode. It's not for nothing that the show has a cult following.

MEMO TO TV EXECS: 'Cult' show doesn't neccesarily mean 'bad', 'low quality' or 'limited appeal' - it's just a matter of marketing.

[Col.Batguano]

Originally posted by vhsiv
The writing and intelligence of the show more than makes up for its shortcomings. It's better than a dozen other [unnamed] US-produced shows that have had more than $1 mil to spend per episode. It's not for nothing that the show has a cult following.

MEMO TO TV EXECS: 'Cult' show doesn't neccesarily mean 'bad', 'low quality' or 'limited appeal' - it's just a matter of marketing.

Thats the key, it is easier to produce something that is factory cookie cutter assembly line television, because it has great production values and it looks neat and clean and at the least is something that the average Joe will put on to watch because he's bored.
I use to watch Star Trek TNG for that reason.
but if you put on a Quality acting and story TV show, like Blake's 7 or Farscape, now there taking a risk, because what if it becomes really popular?
that type of television takes work to produce.
it's not simple it's not cheep and it is more work than a corporate executive is willing to do.
Now I'm not saying thats what happened to Farscape, but it is obvious that Farscape did get shafted.
I for one do not believe sci-fi's FAQ excuses for canceling Farscape, that was the biggest pile of dren I ever read.
It's just that corporations do prefer a fast and easy buck.
I think allot that has been said on this thread is quite valid, that there is allot going on behind the scenes than we know, and also that there needs to be a stronger tone to saving Farscape.........
HOWEVER, ! there can not be an organized boycott against the Sci-Fi Channel especially from "SaveFarscape".
Farscape needs a place to show it's self, and it just might be justification for the Sci-Fi channel to just sit on the current episodes for 2 years and not broadcast them at all.
look what the sci-fi channel did with the reruns
broad cast them five days a week then stopped and put them on only Sunday night.
they had to know it was going to get us angry.
we must not appear to be to week and appeasing, but we must not be rash ether.
I my self am taking advice from this thread and will act on a personal boycott of the sci fi channel, and only watch Farscape mainly because even though I like Stargate SG1 & Babylon 5, it doesn't bother me to miss Stargate will repeat forever, and I can rent Babylon 5 on DVD.
also I will tell advertisers about my viewing habits and let them know by sending the a recite from purchasing there products advertised during Farscape, I'm Currently looking for a New Car and am seriously thinking about the new Cadillac since I've seen the advertisements for them while watching Farscape, and when I get one I will tell them so.
also I will not just wait till Sunday to watch Farscape, my local Video store rents TV shows on DVD including Farscape.
I will deal with this problem with strength, and to be rash is not strength but weakness and fear.

I was one of the rash ones some wise words on this thread reminded me what is important.

[XweAponX]

VIVENDI sells off european arm of MP3.COM!


Sci Fi may be next! Thank Goddess!

http://media.guardian.co.uk/newmedia/story/0,7496,994872,00.html

(ignore the kazaa popup)

The closure is part of chief executive Jean-Rene Fourtou's efforts to reduce Vivendi's debts following a huge acquisition spree by his predecessor Jean-Marie Messier, which last year drove the group to the brink of bankruptcy.

Mr Fourtou plans to wipe out the majority of Vivendi's £12bn debt by auctioning off the company's US entertainment assets, which include Universal Studios, the Sci-Fi channel and its theme parks, and concentrating on its French telecoms and broadcasting businesses.

I dinna ken Sci Fi had Theme parks?!?

HAHAHAHAHA

:frellyou: :boom:

[Klagad]

Hi there!
Thanks for visiting my post and actually to write something down instead of just looking. I wish most people would do the same.
My post was started by mistake, I thought I wrote a reply to you and did hit the wrong lets say key.
I think you're right by the way, a boycott will do more harm than good.
See ya

[B Sharp]

Originally posted by XweAponX
I dinna ken Sci Fi had Theme parks?!?


well, i think it's more like SciFi has a sibling that's a theme park.

Let's hope the rest of the sale goes through soon. and (pause for campaign comm'l announcement) don't forget to write Viacom!

[LordBicen]

My first post here to the board so hi everyone!

While i have read quite a few of these posts, i agree that the boycott of sci-fi doesnt fit the profile of this board, and that this board is in conjuction with the plans to save the show by whatever means nescessary.

Besides, the Cci-Fi/Psy-Fi network wont listen to us anyway. They rose up on the coattails of other failed series in the beginning with it's launch back in 1992 (I being one of the persons that attended one of the Launch Parties in Greensboro North Carolina)
And i preaty much watched it religeously for 11 years, and back then their whole premise was to garner up support for their network so that they could produce new shows and put them on the network as Sci-Fi originals. Unfortunately, just about every sci-fi original show that they have produced they have cancelled, and one thing i have noticed that i find extreemly amusing every time i hear it, is Sci-Fi actually has "the Brass Cahonies" to claim Stargate SG-1 as a Sci-Fi Original and everyone Knows that it was a SHOWTIME original. i'm surprised they dont get sued by showtime for saying that one with the way these money grubbing networks are these days. :rollin:

Farscape was by far the best that they had produced up to date, and even though it's ratings werent that bad (Measuring better than Battlestar Galactica did in the 78), they still cancelled it for the same reasons as Battlestar Galactica, because the episodes were costing too much for them to afford, according to what sci-fi said about it. but what really doesnt make that statement jive though, is that if they cancelled alot of the other Dren that they put on there like the reality T.V. shows (Which i feel have no authorized bearing being on a channel devoted to Science Fiction in the first place) then maybe they would have the nesscesary funds to support a show like farscape.

Truth be told, they promised Farscape the 5th season and then renegged on it, probably because they blew their wad on Dren like Taken, Children of Dune, and this crap that they are slapping a battle star galactica logo on thats supposed to be out this December. and after they blew their wad the time prolly came up to pay for farscape and they looked in the coffers and realized they had over extended their funds out paying for crap like John edward and Tremmors and scare tactics, not to mention the mini-series projects they wanted, and because the ratings kinda slipped on farscape due to more people in tuned with the world after 911 or whatever, and them jockying around with its time slot so much they decided to axe it.

But reguardless of what the Tralk Bonnie Hammer :smash: at Sci-Fi gives as the reason, it doesnt really matter now at this point anyway. What DOES matter, is that we fans pour our support and our hearts out in support of of Farscape in every way we can, and thats why i and you and everyone else is here.

So without making this any longer than it already is hashing over the same things as everyone else, i'll conclude this lengthy mesage as is.

One question though, HOW THE FRELL DOES ONE BECOME A NIELSEN FAMILY? Does Lesley Nielsen have to select you? Maybe someone needs to get another Family up there to do the ratings for new Shows. Aint it about time for the Nielsen family to retire from T.V.? Hey Lets get a new family!

How bout the Murphy's? LOL
:flee:

[waltersgirl]

:hi: