For those hard-nosed commenters who pushed back on this column by reminding us all that for-profit businesses have a right and a duty to focus on the bottom line: you are pushing back on the wrong point. I believe what compelled the critic to write this was not the fact that "One Day" was cancelled, but how Netflix disingenuously tried to distance itself from its own business decision. I think that is a more-than-fair point. I am sick and tired of New Media businesses taking us all for suckers in this manner.
235
It's a no-brainer. Netflix is seeing that the majority of its viewers are not into diversity. No money in diversity. Before anyone screams: Money is what makes corporate America go around. No support, no money. Goodbye!
26
Ironically I arrived here after reading the trend to game college admissions - so now we are lobbying for affirmative action in sitcoms?
33
We don't watch sitcoms much at our house.
18
Newspapers, too, are a business and subject to similar pressures. Should the owners of newspapers keep publishing when readership drops?
10
We all feel cheated when our favorite shows get axed (Will never forgive Fox for Firefly), but honestly, as much as I wanted to like this show, the writing was sub-par and the laugh track was annoying. Some refer to it being "in the classic vein" but it just seemed dated to me.
45
If I was mourning the loss of simply another social problems dramedy, well ....... I wouldn't be mourning.
Besides, anyone coming of age during the run of Seventh Heaven lived enough superficial problem shlock for several lifetimes.
One Day at a Time, though, for all justified praise it gets for inclusive representation, is great precisely because of the skill with which it transcended a simple message of decency and tolerance.
This is a real family in which challenges emerge organically in the daily life of deliciously complex human beings. Life, with its universal disappointments and delights, unfolded in the gallingly untidy way that it does.
I. have no doubt that, with the next seven days, ODAAT will be picked up by another network and emerge with an even larger, loyal following.
27
Never watched but you might move over to The Good Fight. On CBS. Smart, germane, good acting and story. Luca!
I try not to get too attached to anything TV related. That format gave us "President" Trump and the actresses caught up in the College Admissions Scandal. I save a fortune by watching content on Netflix and Prime. These streaming options came along just in time to coincide with our aging and mobility handicaps.
17
Netflix is no different than all the other predatory entertainment corporations. They decide that they want to increase their profits, so they merely increase monthly fees.
A year ago, Netflix had 118 million online subscribers. Merely by increasing monthly fees by $1 per month, it increased its annual profits by $1.416 billion. How's that for clever, savvy management know-how?
Of course, we subscribers don't really get any improvement in service for our $12 per year contribution to what is a corporate management slush fund. There's been an increase in mediocre films, mediocre TV series; indeed, mediocrity RULES, yet the notion of value for money is out the window.
On top of that, the user interface for streaming is truly pathetic. No real rhyme or reason to various options, selection criteria, selection information, or truly screen-/stream-worthy programming. It's nothing more than a collection of carnival sideshows complete with an electronic barker rushing us, prodding us along to view SOMETHING, ANYTHING, in order to increase the numbers for the bean counters.
Often, it's like watching 8mm family films of little Timmy and cute Debbie playing dress up as they sing and dance in a cluttered living room in front of an empty fireplace.
For SiriusXM listeners, it's no different. The most egregious example is SiriusXM's Channel 148, Radio Classics, under the aegis of what seems to be a combination of ignorance, arrogance, incompetence, boorishness, and pigheadedness.
23
A really dumb article. News flash: Netflix is in business to make money. I believe Netflix's monthly fee is very reasonable for the amount of programming available. For those complaining of price, if Netflix keeps paying for shows that have few viewers, the rest of us (non-viewers) are paying more to subsidize the show. Netflix is not our friend, but who expects it to be.
34
This is the most ridiculous outrage piece / conspiracy theory I've read for a while. It's like the author set himself the challenge of writing an article about a complete non-event and we ended up with this.
27
Perhaps because I'm not a millennial and because I worked in corporate media for most of my adult life, I don't consider any corporation to be my friend, to have a personality, or to be under any obligation to genuflect to my every need, whim or identity politics checkbox. I'm not a "fan" of any segment of the corporate conglomerate entertainment industry and also stay off Facebook and Twitter. Doubtless, the streaming business model will deliver up another latino show on Netflix, many, in fact. Feeding the content beast on Netflix is not all that much different than feeding the content beast at the NYT. So, when another or several similar shows pop up on Netflix, we can rest assured the NYT will write 1 or more articles criticizing or faux praising it.
17
Apparently the original show's premise of a divorced single mother's struggle to raise three girls on her own is not woke enough for today's social justice warriors. Maybe the reboot should stand on it's own merits.
13
An amazing show. What a shame. I would support it 100% if it showed up somewhere else. Hulu, Amazon? Sorry Netflix, you are cancelling all my favorite shows. Not good.
10
Fans of any show should be grateful when it lasts no more than two or three seasons, before its inevitable decline into mediocrity and worse.
20
The show was just bad. Painful to watch
16
Had Netflix advertised this show on HuffPost, Slate, or Salon, it would have had millions of millennials addicted, lest they miss today's outrage, or this week's addition to the alphabet soup of gender fluidity.
12
I'm struggling with the entire premise of this essay. Hasn't the New York Times closed down many international bureaus because money was tight, and readers weren't demanding news from every continent? Can't the editors be sad about that decision, recognize it weakens their paper in significant ways, but make the decision anyway, in the long-term interests of the company?
I see nothing wrong with Netflix cancelling the show, and I see nothing wrong with their sincere apology.
18
I feel it was perfect. Not too short or too long. yes, it was a preachy show but sometimes we need something like that to reminds us of things we put to the side just to get our lives going. The show has heart, it was funny and touched things some of the people in this country are going through in life. It was great to see the beautiful, indomitable Rita Moreno in action. The cast had synergy which sometimes is rare. Abuela held the whole family together like glue, just like in many latinos family. Would have I watched it if Miss Moreno wasn't in it? Today I would say 50-50. Everyone that I know watched the show because of her. She was the door to watch the show. That how much pull the lady has.
So to me it was perfect in length. I dislike to see a show die because the writer running out of ideas and throwing in everything but the kitchen sink. When they do that I just stop watching. I can mention some..popular shows that by the end I stop watching by season 3 or 4.. Anyways I love short stories, don't go much for Novels. So I truly enjoyed the shortness of One day at time. People will speak about how a good show it was but was short, than it started so good and then went down the drain. I love K dramas for the same reason, 12-24 episodes, done!! That's a wrap up!: )
10
Watch Love Death and Robots.
Seriously - it’s Hilarous and Brilliant.
2
How could anyone cancel Rita Moreno!!! She alone is reason to watch!
17
You go! Speak truth to Power!
Now speak to Google, Facebook, Amazon, and the rest of the pseudo-friendly, surveillance capital behemoths.
2
I just heard about this show last night when others were lamenting it’s ending. I will have to watch it now and see .
The comments here are really invalidating. Now you get scorned for everything from being too politically correct or for watching tv in the first place.
6
I’m not sure why the reporter didn’t call Norman Lear to ask him why he thought his show was canceled. At his age and position in life, I’m sure he wouldn’t pull any punches. Why base your article on the comments of a PR professional who runs the company’s Twitter feed?
15
"[Netflix] tweets about representation for women of color; it’s invested in series like “Dear White People” and diversely cast romantic comedies."
And yet... ?
This is a tantrum. The world doesn't revolve around anyone.
News flash: Netflix is a business. Duh.
I read the article because I'm avoiding my afternoon work. That said, I did not find this piece to be NYT-worthy. We're making a mountain out of a mole hill, here. The critic could have written more about the show's legacy or what it meant to the people who enjoyed it. Instead, it's focused on a tweet that's not even interesting by Twitter standards. This reads like something I'd find on, I don't know, Jezebel or BuzzFeed.
1
Very few shows have more than three good seasons. I realize it's upsetting when a good show is cancelled, but isn't it worse when a once good show just keeps running, year after year, until the writing is terrible and you hate all the characters?
[It] "represented groups of people who don’t get enough screen time: Latino, working-class, gay, nonbinary, military, recovering addicts, immigrants..."
Dwarfs, quadriplegics, shut-ins, the two-headed, furries, the blind, native Americans, tourists from Iceland...the list of underrepresented and worthy groups goes on and on and, like the weather, nobody does anything about it. The almighty dollar gets to decide who gets on TV. I mean streaming. Whatever.
15
OMG what an absurd glass-half-empty point of view. Netflix paid for 3, count 'em THREE seasons! That is not "throwing away" by any means.
This was a series that, while beloved by critics, never would have been bought by broadcast networks or HBO. And if it had, it wouldn't have lasted 3 years, it would have been canceled after six weeks if it didn't meet their metrics.
How did we get to this ridiculous place where a series is considered a failure if it doesn't last 7 or 10 or 12 seasons. The original Star Trek had anemic rating and lasted 3 seasons ... and changed the world.
... And then slapping Netflix around for using kind and positive language when it cancels a program. How exactly is that a bad thing? Would it be better if Netflix said the series wasn't funny, the actors did a bad job and no one liked it?
I'm planning to add this series to my watchlist and I look forward to it. It is all the episodes I need. Thank you, producers, writers actors .. AND Netflix for supplying the money.
1
I don’t know how the reasoning here translates into “Netflix is not your Friend”.
I'd rather see Deadwood revived. I wonder if the critic cried any tears about that cancellation.
- Krumhorn
I use Netflix and I have never heard of this show. They did NOTHING to promote it and now they want to pretend theyre "heartbroken".
Please, spare me.
I'm not sure of the point of this article. Netflix made a business decision; clearly the show wasn't "worth the money" to them. Okay.
Clearly, a good number of folks liked the show and Netflix wanted to make sure they knew/believed that Netflix wasn't making this choice lightly. Netflix was trying to soften the blow to those people. Okay.
I think the author of the piece is just offended that the show was cancelled, so maybe Netflix failed on point #2, but it was completely reasonable for them to try.
For the author to criticize them for trying makes the author look petty and selfish, not Netflix.
4
#SAVEODAAT
It's my FAVORITE SHOW and not b/c I feel unrepresented by media. I'm a 52 year-old straight white lady with no kids. But I LOVE the Alverez family! I want them to adopt me! And I love sitcoms, especially smart 3 camera which is so rare. I have watched every episode multiple times and am heartbroken. How do we save this show??? Rita Moreno is a national treasure. Everyone on it is great and most impressive of all is how the writers adhere to the old Norman lear tradition of being really funny AND tackling social issues.
#SAVEODAAT
#SAVEODAAT
#SAVEODAAT
#SAVEODAAT
2
The Author writes this article as if Netflix owes business insights to the public. It does not. It is created to generate revenue, not to write poetry for free.
It does what is in its interest.
This
1
Not good enough Netflix! ! Why axe a first class show with wonderful portrayal of real issues when there is so much rubbish aired.
Most disappointed.
2
Several people have referred to the canned laugh trak. I agree.
Unless the purpose is to recreate a time period, complete with laugh traks, it is leaden and will stop me in my "traks" every time.
1
This is just so disappointing. A platform that is a seas of trash and garbage you have this show that is just cancelled. This show was a great upgrade and dealt with real every day issues in an intelligent way. Now we're stuck with shows like Tidelands and YOU. Whats truly sad is Netflix is fishing for people to reach out and save this show from its own decision in that "Does Robin live or die? Its up to you!!!" kind of way.
1
A few months ago my credit card was hacked and my bank immediately suspended it and issued me a new one. When Netflix tried to take their payment that month, it was on my old card and didn't go through. They immediately suspended my account (I've been a subscriber for at least 6 years) and sent me an email saying that there was a problem with my account etc and signing off with "Your friends at Netflix". I have friends at Netflix? And if so, what kind of friend cuts another friend off without at least talking to them? This corporate monstrosity is not my friend. And I'm not going to be their friend much longer either. Friendship is a two way street.
1
Murder in Paradise on Netflix is the best tv show series I've ever seen. BBC shows are just better.
Terrible news. This was a very funny, contemporary and fresh sitcom. Produced by the brilliant Norman Lear who gave us so many great shows - All in the Family, Sanford and Son, Maude to name a few. And Rita Moreno is so fabulous, such a talent.
Netflix has a lot of total junk on it, to me the majority of shows.
I will definitely register a protest and be evaluating my subscription. Idiots.
4
Netflix might not be my friend, but it is a great place to buy content. I watch it more than Xfinity and Amazon Prime.
If you don't like what they did to your favorite show, suck it up or buy your content somewhere else. Just remember that they're in the business of providing content for a fee, and IMHO, they do a great job of it.
That said, I've never found a sitcom that interested me enough to watch a second episode. I didn't even know that this show existed until it hit the news cycle.
"Hopefully this transaction is worth it! But it remains a transaction."
There it is. As long as that transaction is worth it, I'll keep watching. And by the way, their tech support is great too.
I, too, am a Netflix junkie, have been for years and will continue. I subscribe for the first class movies, the excellent original movies, and the foreign and indie films that never play in any theaters in my area. I will watch the series programs offered, if they grab me within the first few episodes. I do not watch sitcoms, original or remakes, as I can't stand the genre (this goes for romcoms as well). Netflix is doing great in my book, and nothing can beat the subscription price for the material offered.
2
Corporations do not always have to base every decision on whether it leads to maximum profit for shareholders. In artistic endeavors great rewards have come from sticking with the artist/project because of the understanding that some artistry is important for our culture. Bruce Springsteen and Prince are examples of artists that executives believed in despite difficulties in initially finding their voice and their audience. Clive Davis thought that Springsteen was worthy of continued support despite low sales. Warner Bros stuck with Prince despite him having 1 hit song out of his first 3 albums because they saw him as a generational talent. Yes, those are musical examples but Columbia records and Warner Brothers were giant entertainment companies. If Netflix truly feels that the show is great and the artists did great jobs at producing the “art”, then they should examine their own failure to market and promote the show because the business people didn’t produce the “business”.
6
Or maybe it's because Norman Lear demanded too much money to continue producing the show?
@Troy Maybe -- but if so, why didn't they just say so, instead of blaming "not enough people"?
2
After reading the first paragraph about the "under-represented" segments of American society, I started to write a counter to that. This, since I have been making mental notes of what I believe is in large increase in TV shows that include gay subject matter or characters. Right now I can't name a single TV show that doesn't include, or hasn't included, the same.
I grew up during a time where people were mean, to the point of cruelty, to those thought to be gay. There were so many stereotypes of gays that, until the end of the twentieth century, they remained low-hanging fodder for jokes and thoughtless pranks Well, at least American society still has bald guys. (Joke. I'm mostly there.)
So as I was briefly fixated on what I thought was an over-representation of gays on TV today, I remembered something that happened yesterday. I was in line at a grocery store. The cashier was in his mid-forties. There was a guy visiting him, also employed by store, and they were conversing. The young guy was lamenting his small biceps, and complimenting the cashier on his "guns". He added that he aspired to be just like the cashier, or have a body "just like Ryan Gosling". With stars in his eyes he mentioned a few others who he wanted "arms like". I swear, it was like I was watching live TV. (Joke)
I thought little of it until I read this piece. I now think the representation of gays might be accurate. As far as recovering addicts, I don't know. Perhaps another trip to the store?
4
I love this show because it relates,so well to the Cuban culture of my generation. I went to school with Pedro Pan children, and with Gloria Estefan. I just love Rita Moreno in anything she does.
Netflix did not publicize this show. I had to search for it upon renewal. Meanwhile, I have seen way too many front and center previews for Birdbox, and shows about murderers. I watch crime shows and dystopic movies, but I watch other things too. And reruns of shows from the 80s and 90s are not high on the list.
I'm surprised that OITNB is returning for one more season. I thought they concluded it when Piper was released.
I hope Sony moves this to Hulu and continues production. There's less on Netflix for me than ever.
9
It’s just a TV show. Cancellation means either finding another TV show to watch or finding better ways to spend your time.
7
“But Netflix isn’t your buddy, any more than ABC or HBO or whoever made your TV set. No corporation is. It is a concern whose purpose is to extract money from you in exchange for entertainment. Hopefully this transaction is worth it! But it remains a transaction.”
That is correct: Netflix is not your buddy, and as you also mention, it is not a charity. Netflix is a business, and they have a fiscal responsibity not only to their shareholders, but to their employees to run that business in a manner that it is profitable and viable, while at the same time providing entertaining content to its subscribers. It’s a balancing act, and who knows for sure whether or not they are truly sorry about having to end what sounds like a good show, but if you don’t like it you can cancel your subscription, and stop allowing them to “extract’ money from you. Or, since talk is cheap, you can take action and rally the fans of One Day at a Time to get the word out to all their friends and family to watch this beloved show to improve the ratings, so that maybe Netflix won’t have to cancel it.
3
I am a WASP, ok? .. no dog in this race for me. this is the funniest sitcom we have watched in many years! Acting superb. Timing excellent. Writers outstanding. What are you thinking?? Give it another year! We’ve recently told at least a dozen of our friends that they need to watch it. I am so disappointed! We pay you, Netflix .. we are the consumers here .. listen to our voice. I hope Amazon Prime or Hulu picks it up and then we would change our streaming service!
4
Thank you for the three seasons to whoever or whatever I should thank for this. My almost-adolescent daughter and I had a ball watching them over the years, and we also had very serious discussions on certain issues thanks to the show. Quite probably, we will both cherish the souvenir of this series for a very long time. What I loved the most is that it chose never to have perfect happy endings with everybody (especially every generations) agreeing on one message. To give one example: the grand-mother will still be blind with love for her male child over her daughter. It was very didactic but in an intelligent way, leaving space for much differences of opinion -- except on one topic, at one point linked with hemorrhoids. I had to explain hemorrhoids to my daughter for her to catch the joke.
5
I look forward to the debut of the James Poniewozik Television Network, where all shows are wonderful and none are ever cancelled for any reason whatsoever.
4
There's a sort of whiny sense of entitlement and pouting running through this piece that is quite grating. Let's get some facts straight, shall we?
1. Netflix has a right to show, or not show, or to cease showing, any show it wants to.
2. Netflix is under no obligation to release viewing numbers. Mr. Poniewozik seems to feel that its his right to see them and judge whether or not the cancellation was really justified.
3. Having a "diverse" cast doesn't entitle a show to be given special treatment or to be judged on different terms than other shows.
4. Anyone truly committed to equality would never, ever want special treatment for a show based on the demographic makeup of the cast.
11
The interesting thing about Netflix that lies behind this article is the algorithms (I assume) they use to show you 'what's on'. As there's no schedule everything of course is available at any time and so they target you with picks based on what you watched before. I watch a lot of foreign and independant movies and European TV. I've never, not once seen a banner for One Day at a Time and you can see why, BUT I have a dear friend in the cast. I do, very much like to watch it. But I am framed as the wrong audience: likely non-Latin and therefore to be glossed over. This is so wrong on so many levels, from the splitting of America into alienated demographics to the fact that Netflix like Youtube has the opportunity to show all of us things about the world OTHER than those we normally experience. And One Day at a Time is a show that does that extraordinarily well. So I say to Netflix, change your approach/systems as to how your content is accessed because right now you have it very, very wrong.
21
The only sensible sentence in this article is, "On some level, I know I'm being unreasonable." I'm worried Mr. Poniewozik may try to harm himself if Kellogg's ever stops making Froot Loops.
10
I’m really sad One Day At A Time hasn’t been renewed. It’s such a great show!
10
Wait what? I don't understand your premise: usually TV companies let it "come out quietly" when they cancel. And that is ok with you. But the facts that Netflix owned it wasn't profitable and, too, a difficult decision to make, render them guilty? That premise doesn't work for me. I agree marginalized groups should be represented on TV! Yes, please! More! But forgiving other corporations for cancelling shows and doing it quietly while faulting Netflix for actually speaking about the process is not a fair comparison. I absolutely agree with your premise that the bottom line should not dictate what is featured, especially given the importance of representing who we are as a nation and world. It seems you're saying this notice is crocodile tears. But corporations, meh, they look to their bottom line and we all know it.
2
what i appreciate about netflix is that for 1 monthly fee of just 8.99, i can watch anything they offer. And netflix is so easy to navigate, with good audio and visual definition. Amazon is the opposite. Poor definition, sluggish connection. Cumbersome interface. And many movies and series are not free, even on Prime. Netflix is a smooth streaming service, while Amazon is more like a vending machine.
9
@PD Wow. I would say just the opposite. I have a really hard time with Netflix trying to read about a show in their interface (actors, description, producer, etc.) without Netflix starting the show - I don't want to see trailers, or previews. I just want to be able to look through the shows, learn about them and then select what I want to watch. I can do that with Amazon.
1
Nice piece. I didn’t even know about this show. Take heart fans, maybe enough people will read this and Amazon or network TV will pick it up!
6
@MVSABR
"I didn’t even know about this show."
You and millions of others like you. Which is why it was not renewed.
1
Turn off the Tv. Live life and Netflix will starve, and your expereince of real people in the real world will be richer, better, more diverse - who knows, you may wander outside and dicover we destroyed the most beautiful thing ever on this earth - it was called nature. Its gone, and we will soon go with it. Goodnight, and "that's the way it is", said Walter Cronkite, ever so seriously.
14
Please keep the show. We need it for survival!! Don’t give up just when it’s getting popular. It takes a while to get to it.
7
Is it possible this is about Sony no longer producing the program rather than Netflix cancelling it without reason?
1
Keep the show, if for no other reason than folks like me will watch it for the sublime experience of seeing Rita Moreno.
18
Anyone at Amazon Prime listening? This is a terrific show, worthy of more seasons.
52
I've already been moving in the direction of cancelling my Netflix subscription - the price just keeps going up and the deluge of 2nd rate programming they keep pushing out is a bore. "One Day at a Time" was one of the dwindling number of shows that kept me coming back to Netflix. I think Netflix is vastly overestimating how much time and money people are willing to spend on a streaming service that is quickly becoming one of many choices - I watch Hulu far more than I tune into Netflix. I'm curious when we reach peak streaming capacity - at what point is there simply too much content on too many platforms for anyone to truly absorb? I feel like it's right around the corner with Warner, Disney, and others coming online. There are only so many hours and so many eyeballs in a day that can watch video content. I think I'll be switching my subscription dollars from Netflix to Criterion Collections newly launched service.
30
One of the finest shows I have ever seen. The power of the acting, the well written storylines, the casting was amazing. We were immigrants, and I was raised by a single mom... this series hit home in so many ways that I can tell you that most episodes brought both tears and joy to my life. Really a shame. If they really do cancel, I will cancel My Netflix subscription on principle alone.
13
I'm approaching everything overload. Between my streaming subscriptions sending me daily updates on what I might like and the Washington Post sending me seemingly individual emails for each byline, I've felt like I'm drowning. I let my Post subscription expire (the Times stays until I die!) and Netflix might be next. Interestingly, for all that Netflix likes to email me, they didn't bother to inform me that the third season of ODAAT was out, even though I had binged the first two seasons. I think they didn't want there to be "enough" viewers.
10
This was a great show with too little exposure. Hopefully, people will watch the 3 seasons like our family did over a couple of weeks and find it worthy of an email or Tweet of support to Netflix. If Netflix or someone else (come on NBC you need another good comedy to rebuild Thursday nights) then the cast can hold its heads high for being a part of a great program with a lot of heart and diversity.
25
Amazon Video or Hulu would be a better choice.
@CharlesM1950: Hardly any exposure at all! I get emails from Netflix all the time about things I might like. I had never heard of this show until an NPR piece the other day about it being canceled. I loved the original show, and this sounds great.
3
@CharlesM1950 Good idea! Maybe someone else will pick it up, fingers crossed.
2
Never heard of this show. And NetFlix likes to tell me what it thinks I will like via email. And generally, they are right. But not this time. I likely would have enjoyed this show. Hopefully I will get to watch the first three seasons.
20
I think Netflix has an algorithm problem. I like all kinds of well written shows but I confident this was never in my feed. Depending who in the family is watching we may is any of 4 profiles. I don’t think it’s ever been on any of them.
27
From reading through the comments, there's a reoccurring comparison between what Netflix is doing and what has happened for decades with network television shows. I believe the key difference is that network television has a finite "bandwidth".
In other words there are 24 hours in day that can be programmed with content. Those 30/60 min slots have a defined value associated with them (which allows networks to charge for commercial time to pay for the show). Networks are trying to scoop up as many viewers as possible during a specific time slot.
Netflix has infinite "bandwidth" to the extent that subscribers are paying for access to their library of content, available at any time. As is the case with brick and mortar libraries, the biggest ones have access to as many publications as possible. Some of the books may not be checked out except for a few times per year. But they're available, nonetheless.
Netflix is on its way to becoming the world's most dominant video content library. And in this pursuit they've chosen the quantity vs. quality approach. That's what makes their reason behind the cancellation a difficult sell. There's a lot of mediocre content on the platform, but ODAAT is actually above average.
So, to use the book analogy again, if Netflix wants to be the biggest, that may also mean subsidizing "The Velveteen Rabbit" with sales of "Harry Potter."
12
Not sure why the other commenters are struggling with the writer's premise about Netflix not being our "friend."
Netflix's statement was dripping with condescension and faux concern for viewers, over an action that didn't make any sense to a lot of us.
It IS hard to understand the economics when we can't see ratings, but ODAAT is a show that takes place almost entirely in an apartment (cleverly laid out the same as the original). Production costs simply could not have been that prohibitive.
I thought part of the idea behind Netflix was to capitalize on "the long tail" and make more shows for more viewing constituencies.
There's certainly an audience for "Grace and Frankie" - a show that would seem to have similar viewer numbers. Certainly finances were not found wanting for "The Crown" or for those episodes of "Friends."
Those shows were actually promoted, though. That probably made a difference.....
41
@Patrick I don't take too seriously or personally the tone of tweets from a big corporation which pays a social media person to sit in a cubicle drafting them. It's a corporation, not a friend.
4
@Patrick - Netflix could have promoted it 20 times a day to me and it wouldn't have made any difference. It's just not a show that appeals to me; I don't watch family shows in general. And BTW, "Grace and Frankie" is actually a very different type of show and I'm not sure why you would think the numbers would be similar.
4
@Patrick
Yes, there are many scolding comments. A lot of animosity for expressing an opinion in an opinion piece.
“Bottom line thinking everyone, don’t you know how the world works”. Where has bottom line thinking gotten us as a culture?
This is a serious question.
2
So an unpopular show was canceled, and the author thinks it deserved to be kept alive just because it had themes he considers important. Well, I'm glad Netflix still makes entertainment for its paying customers and not to please activists.
The tweets are indeed cringy. Clearly some PR people at Netflix felt a special need to kind of apologize for canceling a show that is dear to the heart of politically correct influencers. I'd bet the people tweeting that were not the same people who decided to cancel the show based on its merits - success with the customers.
11
@GS I am not an "activist" although I am liberal yes. But that is not why I loved this show. I found it clever, funny and heartfelt. I am not gay or Latina, although and I only say that because I felt a huge connection to the characters, universal themes of feeling like you want to fit in or be loved etc ... mainly this show was just exceptionally unique, funny , sweet, lovely acting, and Rita Moreno ( 87!!) as a gorgeous confident woman who can still dance her tail off... those things are what I love about the show!
21
Netflix also "resurrects" shows--I just watched Champions, the Mindy Kaling show that got canned from network tv, and am now belatedly mourning its cancellation. It was a great show! (So was One Day at a Time.) I'll echo the other similar comments: that's the way the cookie crumbles--small viewership, small chances of renewal. At least they're in good company: Wiseguy, Hannibal, Dead Like Me, etc.
2
I had no idea what "One Day at a Time" was about. Now that I know, I will watch! How many others like me are out there. Maybe if we tune in Netflix will continue the show!
20
We turn to Netflix to watch films from other countries, in different languages, showcasing different cultures. For purely US-American films there are many sources here in Fort Lauderdale. Danke, gracias, xie-xie, dankon, takk, obrigado Netflix!
3
We could definitely do with corporations striking a less chummy tone with the consumer, in their P.R. and advertising.
9
We have watched every episode of this show and are saddened that we can see no more. We have always loved and admired Rita Moreno, but the secret of this show was not just its real humor and pathos but that the two kids actually grew up before our eyes. And they were real kids, with kids' issues regarding sex and drugs. We will miss this show.
38
As I recall, it had a laugh track. This kiss of death for me no matter how good a show is. I don't need to be told when to laugh.
29
I agree with you about laugh tracks but if you can tune them out, you will enjoy thus show. I am not much if t.v. watcher as I find most network t.v. utterly stupid but this show was a nice, clever escape. Rita Moreno' performance alone is priceless, taking into account she is now in her 80's.
1
Some shows are before their time. To take One Day at a Time and have it showcase the real issues of today’s American culture is so breaks particularly
when we are so tribal right now. I don’t think we should jump on Netflix. Their programming is capable of complexity and bravery....think Thirteen Reasons Why. If people aren’t watching, they aren’t watching.
What a fascinating article!
I wasn’t a “fan” of the show but my wife, after hearing about it from her mother, binged it as much as a two year old would let her. Every now and then I would sit and watch an episode. Now, I said I am not a fan but that doesn’t mean I didn’t appreciate the brilliance of the show. The diverse cast, the surreal and honest story lines, the darkness. It told a clever story of the other “This Is Us,” which is still making it black & white. This show, however, shined light on the “grey.” The Wounded Veterans (I being one) dealing with a broken system and the effect it has on the entire family, the entire community. The reality of multi generational living, sexuality and its pursuit, single parenting, the beautiful differences between us all that make us a community.
I appreciate NYT bringing to light the significance of Netflix pulling this show, and the missing shows of its type amongst the others.
46
I tried to watch the pilot of this show but as a Latino I found it clichéd and condescending and never went back. Perhaps if I had continued watching, I might have some merit in it. For me the great loss—tragedy almost—will be when Jane the Virgin ends after this season. Now that is indeed a great program by any standard.
14
I am a Latina too and the first thing I though when I watched the show was: When did they hire my mother as a writer for this show? I was laughing so loud at how universal among Hispanic families some of the stuff was. Give it another shot.
2
I’m Cuban-American and I couldn’t agree with you more. I tried to watch - really didn’t connect, neither did lots of people I know. It was so cliched Latino - what people imagine it is. Also, no Cuban-American actors. Couldn’t they find ONE in the entire US?
Great article, thank you.
Netflix is not your friend. They’re still just a numbers driven corporation that wants you to spend as much time as possible in front of a screen, for better or worse. Watch out.
19
@Seth Hosko
"a numbers driven corporation"
Yes, art succeeds or fails based on how many people want to pay for it. That's just unfair, and success based on merit is way overrated. What we need is a PBS for streaming. So many British soap operas and costume epics going unseen. It's an outrage. Soak the rich. Bernie! Etc.
I get you. But there is a middle line here not yet taken, where the next generation is looking for more out of corporations than transactions. We’ve seen the results of that, from oil to social media companies and we believe organizations, and people, can be better. Don’t be so cynical to think it won’t happen. It will and it is.
2
Netflix made a big mistake. In addition to being an entertaining, well-crafted sitcom in the classic vein, One Day at a Time presented an opportunity to watch the iconic stage and screen actor Rita Moreno. At 87, she gives a performance that is by turns moving and hilarious. She dances, does high kicks, and generally puts the rest of the (very strong) cast to shame with her charisma, beauty and energy.
78
They did the same thing to Marco Polo after two seasons. Not cool Netflix.
8
I will greatly miss this wonderful, heartwarming, topical show. I only discovered One Day at a Time a few months ago and became a fain right away. Few shows currently deal with important issues of our time in such a funny and touching way. At least there 3 seasons to watch and rewatch.
17
I'm sorry that one of your favorite shows was cancelled, Mr. Poniewozik, but if it failed to draw an audience over three seasons, then I'm with Netflix on this one. Like every other TV producer, it's driven by the bottom line and I suspect there was too much red ink.
24
I've always wondered how a Netflix original series gets quantified to determine the level of success or profit. I still have no idea after reading this article. I guess it must be something very simple, like a minimum number of dedicated viewers following each season.
Doubtless, viewers will miss watching the legendary Rita Moreno, one of the few remaining cast members of Singing in the Rain, among other things.
10
I thought Netflix was a video rental business - I had no idea it was supposed to be my friend. Should I feel let down by my "friend?"
36
A for-profit company measures revenue vs. expenses. That's the bottom line. And the 'opportunity cost' of continuing to produce one show vs. using that money to produce a different show that might cost less to produce/make more money is also factored in.
So, Netflix is only in the business to make money. Netflix didn't cancel a show you love because they are mean or stupid. Netflix determined that the money spent on One Day At A Time would be better spent in another way, PERIOD.
BTW the quality of any show, writing and acting, production values, is only important if it translates into high(er) revenue aka more money.
And more BTW, even PBS makes these determinations.
20
If not enough people watch this show, than the show should be cancelled as a business profit decision not any other spin. Why does it come to question all too often when complaining about companies decisions? Simply put : the shareholders interests are tantamount to everything else.
3
My only advice to the writer is to do what I do after I finish binge watching a very good series: watch it again (and again if it’s that good).
6
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. The way we receive our entertainment has changed radically and, at least for the moment, we'd got options to the all-or-nothing pricing of the old, monopolistic Comcast. But Netflix, Amazon, and AT&T (parent now of DirectTV, HBO) are stepping into the shoes of the old media, and not wasting time making it known they're in charge, not cord-cutters like us. They all want to be the next Hollywood-like "studio," chasing awards and claiming creative credit for "producing" when all they do is pay for it.
AT&T just raised the price of the already pricey streaming choice, DirecTVNOW, by 20-50% depending upon the new choices in reshuffled channel packages. And everyone's talking about how expensive content is...now that they've driven up the market. The fact that you're writing an article about recycled TV show says it all; a lotta hype but we're still looking for select, good, programming in a sea of blandness.
8
@JP - Spot on!
It is all about the dollar. I doubt anyone thinks the cancellation was about anything else - no viewers, cancel. Netflix is no different than any other network. We parse these decisions to the nth degree, when it is much more simple...
Over the years I have seen many programs I loved go by the wayside for the very same reason. I couldn't believe no one was watching! Let's save our mountain-making for another time.
8
The show is entertaining- love Rita Moreno. Topics are interesting and relevant. When are vets and their issues so compassionately presented in media?
I don’t get it. Why cancel?
28
In the absence of ANY evidence to the contrary, we could also simply accept Netflix's explanation.
Real journlaism would uncover facts to dispute the existing narrative or, failing that, simply write a fond farewell piece to a TV show he or she enjoyed.
20
@Spike
You have to remember that "real journalism" does not apply to the opinion and arts pages. It barely applies these days to the "hard news" section, wherever that is. The walls separating them are all but obliterated.
2
These are great points, and Netflix should also have some accountability for how they advertised the show to existing users. I, for one, did not ever see the sitcom promoted on my account. So they shouldn't be so passive in thinking they don't have enormous control in introducing their product to viewers. Those trailers are very persuasive if they actually pop up!
17
My daughter now says there is nothing worth watching. It was, in her words, the only show that dealt with real issues.
33
@Jane: I agree with your daughter. Stellar cast, outstanding writing, actual depth and talent. (It’s dismaying to read the dismissive comments—no surprise, sadly. I can’t help but try to imagine what some commenters watch or have watched. Reality TV brought us this prez and these abhorrent times—that writing was on the wall decades ago now and deserves to be canceled. “One Day at a Time” was perhaps too good for us and who we’ve become?) I do hope a wiser carrier/network will pick it up and support the show.
18
@Eli - Well said!
2
@Eli Loved the show. I think most Americans sadly want to watch a lot of junk and crime shows. I hope it gets picked up elsewhere. Norman Lear and RIta Moreno are sheer genius!
4
Maybe Netflix is making a special show of this cancellation in the hopes that more people will come out and save it. Other shows have been saved from cancellation plans before; one even eventually spawned decades of spin-offs, movies, remakes, and copycats (yes, you, Star Trek).
5
I watched the original when I was a kid and I thought this hit all the same notes - funny, honest and very sweet. It should be a keeper.
11
I found Netflix lacking after three seasons. I consulted with the other two viewers in my household, a/k/a, our Programming Department. We completed a complex analysis of all our viewers’ program choices; that information is confidential. We voted unanimously to cancel Netflix due to lack of viewers. Based on the same lengthy analysis, our Programming experts previously cancelled Hulu, Showtime, Cinemax and Epix. We are now conducting six month trials with AcornTV and BritBox.
66
@Linda Kazel
Acorn and BritBox are okay. You'll quickly get tired of all the cop/detective/murder o' the week shows, just as that wall-to-wall genre became boring as all get out on U.S. tv a decade ago.
2
@Linda Kazel Interesting. So where on you on standard cable, HBO and the like?
2
I don't get chagrin over this. Netflix a business, they make and stream movies for profit. They are not here to do charity work. They are not being dishonest making decisions that are genuinely in sync with their business model, but not so much with their values as a company. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
5
1. HBO is different from the other stations mentioned because it is not funded by advertisers. It only cares about viewers, because that is their main source of revenue.
2. Four seasons is really good for a series. Most don’t last that long. Also the way this is worded means it is possible that enough consumer sentiment might result in a holiday special, or even another season.
3. Why are you so bitter about a TV show? It is just entertainment. Please calm down, this sort of anger is not good for your health.
12
Maybe the best thing would be to stop with this fantasy that TV or movies ever really show "someone like me". It's all make-believe, folks. Especially for low-intellect shows like One Day at a Time.
And while we're at it, maybe we could stop with the other fantasy: that people desperately need to see someone they think is like them or they just won't be able to get up in the morning and live their life. I really don't think I've ever seen a TV or film character and thought "Hey, that's me. I'm so inspired to be my best."
Role models are way overrated. And the assertion that role models are necessary for certain kinds of people to be happy and succeed is an outright lie.
45
@Cary spot on with your assessment. Role models especially fictional ones are over rated.
5
@Cary Low intellect? Exploring addiction, aging, depression, sexuality, getting an education in middle age? Quick dialogue on contemporary issues is low intellect? I see it as low income, not low intellect. There is a substantial difference.
As for role models, I can only say that I'm sorry that you haven't been able to find them. I have many, from fiction and real life, and they inspire me every day; I'm certainly a better person by their examples. I find role models underrated, if anything.
As a teacher, I have kids tell me that I'm a role model for them with some regularity. I also try to provide them with role models from fiction and non-fiction. When they discover someone "like them" I see those students light up; I see how it changes them.
Maybe we can succeed without role models. And yet, I'm sure that I'm much happier when I find role models to inspire me. I think that's true of most people, even if it's not true of you. I hope that one day you find out what I'm talking about from first hand experience - it's a wonderful feeling.
12
@Cary
Have you ever watched it? I have to say I think I can guess the demographic of the people outright dismissing this article And people’s love for it.
2
Despite being a longtime Netflix subscriber, I only heard of this show when I happened to hear an interview with Justina Machado on the radio. When I heard it was produced by Norman Lear that was enough to get me to check it out. I found it quite funny and well written, and have almost finished the first season. I have since been telling others of the show.
There are lots of things competing for attention when it comes to entertainment, and I think some shows may take a while to catch on. I'm sorry to hear Netflix is cancelling the show and I hope it finds another home. At least I have 2 more seasons to enjoy.
16
I wanted to like this show and I appreciated the cast and characters but I just couldn’t get into it. I was much more sad when sense8 got cancelled, which by the way has a trans main character, multiple nationalities and races, etc. but also a super interesting story.
We don’t usually watch tv shows because we should (with the exceptions made for documentaries, history etc. which are also interesting); it’s all about being entertained and/or telling us a good story, hopefully a good combination of the two.
Focus on the writing and the viewers will follow.
4
I guess that extra dollar that they added to the price of the basic package wasn't enough.
From my perspective, Netflix IS a really good deal, but maybe in the name of quality, it SHOULD be a little more expensive!
Just a thought.
5
Maybe if it didn't pay so much for Friends it could have kept this program.
14
Netflix can and does internally promote/market it's own content to subscribers via datamining their preferences and viewing histories. I suspect that this particular show failed to accumulate enough repeat viewers, ie those subscribers who received a targeted "You might like..." recommendation, tried the show once, then came back for more episode. It's certainly a test I would run if I wanted to figure out where to commit limited production resources in the service of retaining subscribers. Remember, fans of the show can watch the existing content as much as they want, so canceling the series has less impact on their satisfaction as netflix subscribers than it would if the show was on an advertiser funded delivery channel.
1
i've been a member/customer/client of Netflix for many years - don't know exactly how long BUT
for $12.74 i can have 2 movies "out" at a time - for a total of
say 16 movies per month
Amazon increased its' rentals to $3.99 or $4.99 or $5.99 each; even a one-hour episode is now $3.99 SO
10 $3.99 movies + 3 $4.99 movies + 3 $5.99 movies, for a total of 16 movies, would cost $73 per month
go figure...i love Netflix (Amazon, not so much)
6
@peggy Amazon Prime? 12.99 = all the movies you want to stream per month
1
I don't think the world was exactly clamoring for a remake of "One Day at a Time," no matter how it was bent into current trope loves. And anyone who believes that Netflix is acting in the best interests of its viewers instead of its profits is fooling themselves.
14
The Headline is right, Netflix, (nor Apple, the NYTIMES, Netflix) is not your friend.
Like most companies is a business, not a charity or a Social Justice Entity.
If people were watching the show they would have kept it going. They Tried, the show was heavily hyped and promoted.
It seems alot of these "issue comedies" are failing spectacular. I am thinking specifically of The Connors and Murphy Brown. Two other shows that were promoted and hyped with lots of "special episodes" and lecturing from the left.
9
@Sara The Rosanne revival was exactly as you say but in the entire run of The Conners I only remember a couple of vague political references. In fact, I think they deliberately dialed it down because of the negative reaction to the Rosanne revival.
@Sven Im afraid thats wishful thinking
Connors lost over 55% of Rosannes audience according to Connors cheerleaders EW.COM. It has NOT been renewed, and is not on the Fall Schedule. Though the cast says they hope it is.
Murphy Brown was after being highly promoted is finito. Over its 13-episode revival run, it averaged a 0.84 in the demo — ranking last among CBS’ eight sitcoms. Thats including the highly rated premiere. The show lost audience in droves week after week
4
I was surprised by how much I really liked this show. I was so happy when a third season came online that I ended up watching it all too quickly. Yes the show had a lot of "representation" but it was also just a really good show.
24
Well, if it were a bad decision, we are assured, at least, that Netflix remains consistent in the quality of its decisions.
5
As others here point out, this criticism comes across as a bit over the top and somewhat unwarranted in the context of capitalism. Concerning the show, I tried to watch it and found it quite ordinary sitcom fare, notwithstanding the somewhat excessive critical praise. The only good thing about it were Justina Machado and Rita Moreno, both brilliant yet underused actresses, but even their talents weren’t enough, in my book, to keep it afloat.
Unfortunately, the article’s tone invites the sort of racist trolling about affirmative action and political correctness, and makes it harder for minoritized performers, writers, and producers to ply their trade in a still relatively white entertainment industry.
13
"TV needs more of the representation that “One Day” delivered..."
Why?
Are you going to spend your OWN hard-earned money to make a show clearly not enough people wanted to watch, potentially losing YOUR investment? I think not. So why should Netflix?
Quaint ideas about what people "should" watch have been espoused for decades. But, ultimately the TV business (and entertainment in general) is ruled by the tastes and preferences of the many over the few.
Until you put YOUR OWN MONEY where your mouth is it's disingenuous to criticize Netflix for at least attempting something that I guarantee many executives predicted internally wasn't going to be financially successful.
28
@JOHNNY CANUCK - I think the point was that Netflix is trying to have it both ways.
I'm not sure that keeping the show would of made or broken Netflix profits. I guess some would've hoped they kept the show on in the interest of diversity in television. Guess that was too much to ask of an organization that at the end of the day is only interested in profit margins.
14
@JOHNNY CANUCK
They didn’t market it. And Netflix doesn’t use advertising it’s a paid subscription. Maybe they could cancel the walking dead - or did they. That was tiresome after the first two seasons.
Do we go with what popular culture likes when it comes to the arts? That is sad. Never has this been where the innovation is.
4
@JOHNNY CANUCK
Since most of us aren't producers, we put our money where our mouth is by subscribing ... or not.
2
One Day At A Time is one of the best new shows I've seen in a very long time. It's a shame that it wasn't better know. Maybe Netflix didn't promote it effectively.
I'm getting fed up with Netflix. There are some good things there, but an awful lot of nonsense.
13
@gloryb Really? The show is frankly pretty ordinary. I think this article is only being written in NYT because Netflix cancelled a show with a Latino cast.
Good riddance. Simplistic, predictable. IMHO and after all that is all any one can express, so stop with the mournful pronouncements about “the best show “ in the universe. Move on.
21
I watch certain shows to escape from the horror of the news in Occupied America. I don't watch them for a lecture on diversity.
18
Anyone who thinks Netflix is their friend is truly stupid. I feel sorry for these people. This is a financial transaction. You pay and Netflix delivers content. Do you pay your human friends to be everything you want?
Lots of critically acclaimed, beloved shows get cancelled due to poor viewership. It can be sad but that's the reality of the industry. Anecdotally, I can say that every single person I know has (re)watched at least 1 episode of Friends on Netflix. Many binged the whole thing. I wouldn't be surprised if $100M for Friends was reasonable. I don't think anyone I know has watched ODAAT.
14
@Niche I have not watched a single Friends episode
1
Those readers who don't know how to curate shows reflexively deride and excoriate Netflix. Here's a list of a few of their original prestige shows: Mindhunter, Narcos, Ozark, [the very much discussed] Russian Doll, Lost in Space, Babylon Berlin, Stranger Things, and Alias Grace. Netflix also offers third-party prestige shows such as Breaking Bad, Alias Grace, Rectify and Bates Motel.
3
But this is the consequence of the convergence of neoliberalism, capitalism and identity politics. (Of which the Times is hardly immune.) I am cynical of all the identity politics moves made by any corporations, from #metoo, gender fluidity, #oscarsowhite, ad nauseam etc. . . which, as far as I am concerned, have actually eclipsed the real political, legal, and health issues facing women, gays, and black people.
5
The laugh track killed it for me after the first episode. I've guess I've been so spoiled by all the excellent laugh track-free comedies put out by the alternative networks that, out of irritation or out of principle, I never watched again. NETFLIX: If you're trying to put out an intelligent show, don't insult your audience's intelligence with moronic canned laughter. We can decide on our own what to laugh at and when.
94
My exact experience; was looking forward to it (especially Rita Moreno!) but could only stand about 10 minutes. Nowadays if it has a laugh track it doesn't have me watching.
25
@Steve
I found a WaPo article that would suggest it wasn't a laugh track/canned laughter - it was a live studio audience. The point about what to laugh at and when still stands, of course, but at least it wasn't the producers trying to decide for you - it was just the original audience.
9
@Jay N
Laugh tracks have been around since TV began. Before TV, radio programs conducted and broadcast in front of live audiences made the sound of audience responses integral to a medium delivered straight to your home. These sounds gave you the sense that you were there, part of the audience. Of course over time, laugh tracks for many shows were faux, dubbed in, automated, but that doesn't mean they don't make a contribution to the production.
I really didn't realize the significance of the laugh track until I was part of the studio audience at the filming of a popular situation comedy episode in Burbank about 14 years ago. The writers and the actors used the reactions from the audience to do on-the-fly retakes and re-writes. We, the audience, really were a part of the production and success of that episode. I watched the final cut episode when it was broadcast on TV -- sure, they dubbed in a few extra laughers over the actual size of the audience, but the timing and level of reaction were true to our real experience.
Hence, I can appreciate and handle a laugh track, particularly for show produced in front of a studio audience. It's existence doesn't mean I have to laugh or distract from my enjoyment, it just means some folks thought something was funny, or surprising, or sad, at certain moments in the show, and you, the viewer, may want to feel a part of that.
9
Is this article meant to be... sarcastic? Netflix ran 3 seasons of ODAAT before deciding to cancel, which is 3 seasons better than not running anything at all.
8
Sad. Netflix probably thinks it's a person, not a corporation, and a violent white male person who's a couch potato at that. Who else would watch drek like its latest schmuck buddy film that sort of celebrates racist killers in South America, called Triple Frontier. If you're wondering how the New Zealand shooter got that way, look no further!
@Hr
Awww racist killers? That is way over the top. I saw the Longest Day recently and was appalled by the racist Americans killing those other guys because they were German. I can’t say Triple Frontier was the best piece of work but it did tell a story and deal with the impact of violence, never ending war, ptsd, and the drug wars with some nuance for an action thriller. If you actully saw it you would know that.
Netflix’s announcement actually shows some forethought. Maybe we should blame Sony for charging so much for it or the actors for demanding payment for their labor?
I didn’t care much for the original ODAAT and have never watched the current version. That being said, I don’t want a “relationship” with Netflix. I pay to watch programming that I want to watch and not what some network executive wants me to watch. There needs to be a place for niche programming like ODAAT and if Netflix can’t be that place, hopefully some other outlet like Amazon will pick it up. Frankly, if Netflix could afford to pay idiotic amounts for Friends (an aging fairy tale if ever there was one), it ought to be able to spare a few bucks for something current.
2
I wonder a bit about the metrics at play at Netflix. On broadcast TV and basic cable, advertisers matter and so you have to produce enough viewers to make them happy. Netflix isn’t indentured to advertising, and I would think people who subscribe to Netflix do so for the whole catalog of shows rather than just a single entity. (Though I am sure some people sign up for a series and binge and then cancel.) So that should leave Netflix a lot of leeway to keep a show that is a critical,success even it if doesn’t meet whatever threshold they want for viewers. There is a lot of crap in Netflix. They would do well to keep some prestige showers for a more diverse viewership.
1
I like Netflix, but I never mistook it for my friend.
Neither did I mistake Amazon Prime for my friend, before or after it canceled Tig Notaro's droll and wonderful One Mississippi (which I immediately recommended, in a letter to Netflix's Director of Scripted Programming, that she pick up).
The good news for ODAAT fans is that there are many streaming services, all hungry for content, so maybe this will end up on Amazon or Hulu -- or perhaps even on a regular broadcast or cable channel. If you really miss the show and want to see it live on elsewhere, someone start an online petition, so another outlet will see the built-in audience potential of making it theirs.
7
If the cake was loved by a small group but it wasn't a big seller, and the recipe was expensive, Netflix has the right to accept congratulations for the cake's creation, the financing and the distribution, and they have the right to pull the plug when they accept the realization of bottom-line failure. Netflix is not in business to make minority groups happy year after year. If a product's growth is limited or it doesn't sell, no one is entitled to have it last forever.
22
Netflix knows exactly who watches every program and when. So I assume it is telling the truth when it says that "not enough people watched it". We, the Netflix subscribers, are paying for the shows with our subscription money. If we are not watching the show, then you could say that Netflix was not our friend if it had continued to charge us for producing a show that we do not care to watch. Perhaps this was, as the critic claims, an objectively great and unique show, but if we (defined as "enough Netflix viewers") do not care to watch it, then why should we pay for producing it?
7
@MistyBreeze
We financed it/ the subscribers.
Let's look at the data: Netflix sponsored this show for three years. Three years! The statement from Netflix is that there were not enough viewers to make it work for a longer period of time. Here's my judgment: Netflix is by far the most remarkable, courageous, company on the planet for filmmakers. It purchases films from around the world, including many, many films and shows from Latin America. As a moviegoer, inveterate traveler, Hispanic, and, at least in the past, a student filmmaker, I would accept any Netflix decision instantly over any other corporation involved in the movie business.
13
Netflix is at it's best when innovating new original material and NOT recycling old tired stuff that was canceled for obvious reasons years ago. Lighten up and adapt.
6
"I am not a mind reader. Maybe the sentiment is sincere, maybe it’s spin, maybe a little of each. Either way, Netflix is trying to throw away its cake and get credit for having baked it."
Why do we need a NYT article reacting to Netflix's tweet about the end of a television-type show.
Do we not have more than enough actual news? What benefit is there to mixing that high volume of important daily news with information that nobody benefits from reading?
60
@polymath
People not represented loved it. They do not see themselves reflected in much entertainment and media. For you, perhaps it does not matter, for others it does.
10
@polymath
Um, if you don't find it beneficial to read about a television show, why did you read the article and take time to respond? The NYT home page is bursting at the seams with news today, and many of those articles have comments sections.
7
You read it. Didn’t you have more important things to read?
I will miss this show.
9
I watched the show a few times. Very appealing cast. (Justina Machado, particularly, deserves a great part on a great show) But mediocre writing at best. Gave it a few chances to improve. It didn't. Just because a show has good intentions doesn't make it good.
But surprise, surprise, Netflix is a media company not your friend. Seems strange to put such a socio-political spin on absolutely everything (talking about the author not Netflix).
25
Mr. Poniewozik,
I sincerely appreciated the larger point you were making about how Netflix is being disingenuous with its tweets, as if it too were a hapless victim, and not the decision maker here. Of course it is the prerogative of Netflix to cancel (or create) any series it sees fit ,and of course it is a business at the end of the day. However, as others have suggested, it is not so black and white. Not only will we not know what the actual numbers for viewership are, but also we do not know how aggressively Netflix promoted the show to its existing customers.
But more to the point, if the choice is to make the hard 'adult' business decision to cancel the show, then do not turn around and tweet like a helpless child.
In the future if people really want to make a point to Netflix, they should tell Netflix they are canceling their memberships for just one month as a response to a cancelation. This is a more effective way for viewers to weaponize their lamentations.
3
This is a great show. It's one of the few comedies on TV that my wife, kids, and I enjoy watching together. I wish Netflix would reconsider, and I hope another service will pick it up if they don't.
17
My teenage daughter and I love this show since it is funny, yes, but also does a fantastic job illuminating the challenges, ironies and complexities of relationships among a diverse cast of characters. It has sparked quite a few conversations on important issues such as parental expectations, mental health, drug use, military veterans, hoarding, the 1%, the environment etc. The viewpoints and concerns of ALL the characters, of different ages and backgrounds, are shown to have validity. SHOWS LIKE THIS HELP IMPROVE UNDERSTANDING AND TOLERANCE AND I HOPE IT CONTINUES SOMEWHERE!
35
In a capitalist system that values money above all else, I suppose we are left to patch together the tapestry of stories that will help us move through our own lives from wherever we can find them. I think this is probably the function churches were supposed to serve, but I think churches stopped doing that a long time ago. Many of us grew up with TV and I think TV still shapes important aspects of contemporary thought and individual personalities and I mean that in a good way.
I know I depended on reruns of "That Girl" to assure me I could go after a career and not be focused on marriage above all. I absorbed the idea that women could be leaders from "Star Trek Voyager," and "Six Feet Under" taught me so much, I could never properly describe it.
A lot of people say you shouldn't take lessons or role models from something as trivial as TV, but I think many of us just absorb these lessons because our brains are wired to do so.
I made it through school, self-funded, on lessons I learned from TV, made it into a pretty good life and out of one that felt like a jail to me because I had examples in the fiction of TV.
So while there is not any kind of business imperative that demands this show stick around, I do wish there was a period of patience that could give a show like this the chance to find its legs - or failing that, some mobility across platforms.
People need it and I think we are better for it.
14
I had never heard of the show and have been streaming Netflix for years. Probably could have watched all three seasons in the time I have wasted looking for something worthwhile to watch on Netflix.
56
One of the reasons Netflix didn't cancel it quietly is that TV series don't really get "cancelled" any more, at least not in the way they used to.
There won't be new seasons but the series isn't "over" to the millions of people Nexflix would like to begin watching it. And even somewhat critical publicity like this article helps them attract potential viewers.
It was (is!) a very watchable show–-its familiar sitcom conventions made it TV comfort food, but it was also genuinely tasty, especially Machado.
6
Netflix is really turning on the propaganda spin to cover there tracks here. Maybe, like so much these days they will walk back their talk and put the show back on. Nothing like a little controversy to boost the ratings. Now that they got there spinning down, Netflix for President 2020.
2
I find the criticism of Netflix here quite silly. No, Netflix is not trying to take credit for "having baked the cake." In that analogy, "baking the cake" would have been to continue the show, and they are not asking for credit for that. It makes perfect sense to have to cancel some plan and to regret it at the same time; we all do it all the time in our private lives.
4
@Rodrigo The baking part is the first three seasons. Throwing the cake out is cancelling it. And large corporations are not people. The decision making and the factors going into the decisions are vastly different. Giving corporations personhood can only hasten our end stage capitalism. Corporations are not people. Their lives are not human lives, but a machine that consumes them for the ultimate goal of profit.
2
"On some level, I know, I’m being unreasonable."
You're not being unreasonable. But in fairness to Netflix, the statement was just a piece of patronizing Orwellian doublespeak by a "tech" company adapted for today's world of political correctness, identity politics, and social media vocal minority lynch mob outrage. Next evolution will be an AI algorithm that will scour social media victimhood trends, then generate and post an ever-so-nice statement automatically without any human input. Welcome to the 21st century.
5
I'm also a Netflix junkie--I watch virtually all their original program, and I never watched this show, though I was aware of it. I'm also old enough to remember the first iteration of this show from the '70s and not sure if there was much demand to bring it back. Unlike Full House, which I remember from its original run in the eighties and my teenage daughter also remembers from its second life in reruns on Nickelodeon, this show had no existing audience that was eagerly awaiting its resurrection.
After reading this piece, I watched the first episode of the first season to see if I had missed anything--or if Netflix had made a terrible decision--and I'm surprised the show lasted 3 seasons on Netflix with its tired plot and canned laughter. Maybe the show got better after this first episode? Who knows? It seems to me to be a very typical sit-com that one would find on the networks for a season or two.
17
I'm disappointed. It's a great show, and both my teen daughter (16) and I (49) enjoyed it immensely. I think it would be within Netflix's best interests to try to get more audience for such a great show (I didn't watch it until this year, and then I fell in love with it, watching all three seasons in just a couple of months. I was late to the party, and I hadn't heard much about it, but once I saw a couple episodes I was hooked. Perhaps part of the viewership problem is not content, but advertising/marketing.
Maybe Hulu or Amazon Prime can pick it up. They'd be wise to do so.
13
This show wasn't brilliantly innovative. But, it was funny, sweet, distinctive, and complex. I don't agree with the author on its antagonization of Netflix; I will miss this show.
2
Three seasons is about all any show should have. After three seasons, directors and producers start forcing characters to fulfill favored plots lines instead of allowing them to evolve organically and that behavior, characters acting out-of-character to meet plot requirements, is the definition of melodrama and the reason watchers begin to say things like, "It doesn't seem as good as when it started." Better to go out on top and well-liked instead of rusting away on the junk pile of worn out series.
8
@Gioco
I agree! this is my observation as well.
1
@Gioco The Sopranos, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Dexter, Justified, Nurse Jackie, The Americans, Homeland, Rectify, Bates Motel, The Killing, Downton Abbey, Ray Donovan, Berlin Station, Narcos, Fargo, Better Call Saul, Bosch, Twin Peaks, The X-Files and The Expanse are all prestige shows (X-Files perhaps just "near" prestige) that are/were just getting good after three seasons or at least still going strong.
9
@Gioco Seinfeld deserved and got more than 3 seasons...
4
Oh you got to love the tease to this story - "Netflix canceled one of the best shows on TV." BBBWWWWAAAHAHAAHAHAAHAH!
Actually I think all 637 tv shows are each one of the best. It's like an Oprah show. "You are the best, and you are the best, and you are the best."
I would like the NYT to edit the tease to "Netfilx canceled a TV show."
Give me a break.
10
I didn't even know it existed, which is the main hazard of netflix's curation (and also, the likelihood that they are reinforcing selections based on what I have previously watched).
52
As a white gay male of a certain age, I loved the original ODAAT, but I also thoroughly enjoyed and loved the remake. The cast was perfect, and the writing crisp, funny, and on topic. Although the setting of a Cuban family in LA was a bit jarring for someone who lives in South Florida, I enjoyed all the Cuban products, foods, and references, not to mention music and culture. The sexy male torsos (yes! Todd Grinnell and Ed Quinn) were a nice touch for gay and female fans of the show. Rita Moreno is a treasure, and Justina Machado is terrific, as are Grinnell, Isabella Gomez, Marcel Ruiz, and Stephen Tobolowsky. While I appreciate Netflix's lament, the fact is they did not advertise or promote the show. I had to tell people about it, and once they watched they loved it, too. Make a fourth season, Netflix, and promote the show this time, please!
117
@TJ "While I appreciate Netflix's lament, the fact is they did not advertise or promote the show."
Agreed. A lot of people simply didn't know it existed. I posted about the cancellation on my social media accounts and was surprised at how many people knew only of the original.
13
@TJ
True I just heard about it last night bc it is ending. It was not promoted at all.
10
@Patrick & TJ,
I have Netflix, and I had NO IDEA the remake I heard about a few years ago had actually hit screens. (I'll admit I'm an idiot.) I didn't look for it, but they didn't remind me either. Instead of trying to get me to rewatch House of Cards, they could have shown me this at least once!
10
I watched the show once. It wasn't very good. Nothing felt unforced, especially the leaden political agenda. You know those sessions at 11 am on the second day of the Democratic convention that nobody watches? This was the sit-com equivalent.
Good riddance. And spare me the tears, Mr. TV Critic. Most of us want you to be an arbiter of quality, not a political activist.
16
This criticism of Netflix is over the top. Netflix is a business, not Public Television.
This is so simple. A show needs to have viewers to be viable and justify financial investment. Netflix couldn't have been any more clear: "in the end simply not enough people watched to justify another season."
It's too bad they cancelled a critically acclaimed show, but it's also too bad few people were watching it.
42
@Jim W
Netflix is deserving of this criticism and so much more. Compared to the overwhelming dreck that constitutes "Netflix Originals" (which is a deliberate corporate misnomer). The ODAT reboot is actually watchable.
Netflix spent the first decade and a half of its existence building up a loyal following of movie enthusiasts. The last five years they have been systematically driving those enthusiasts away with an ever dwindling offering of watchable shows much less movies anyone wants to see. As they continue to streamline and dumb down their User Interface, it becomes more annoying to use.
And lastly, as a literate consumer of cinema, documentaries, shorts and television, I turn to Kanopy where I once relied on Netflix.
Netflix since you don't care about my friendship why should I care about yours.
11
@Jim W. But it’s also clear few people knew about it. Their business model is flawed. The advertising part.
3
Are the demographics - especially by age - of who tunes into stream Netflix versus watch on broadcast TV different? If so, that may be where this show was a mismatch for Netflix. Maybe someone else will pick it up.
2
Wanted to say that this element of transaction is such an obscured part of so many American entertainment institutions, from TV to sports. We've seen this in other industries as well, and it never ceases to amaze me how far we have to go in seeing that corporations don't have the public interest at heart.
Haven't watched ODAAT, but will now.
11
In other words because the show was politically correct it deserves to be treated with favoritism despite low ratings then a show that may not be as politically correct. They are I have summarized this entire article.
110
@Garth No, the article is saying that Netflix had a choice to not cancel the show and to turn around and try to paint itself as the victim for cancelling the show is disingenuous
105
@Christian
So, they couldn't *possibly* regret that not enough people watched it for it to be practical for them to renew it? No company has ever believed in a product only to find that the demand wasn't there, and had to abandon it?
12
@Joe Blow 7314 great point. No doubt they struggled to cancel it because of quality and admitting that comes back to bite them with articles like this
3
This is a great show. My husband, daughter (15) and I watched 3 episodes last night. Once, we went back to have a second laugh at a particular scene. It’s not easy to find a show that appeals to both parents and teens. And I don’t mean that in a finger-wagging “nothing is wholesome anymore” kind of way. We have different interests and preferences. But we can all agree that OFAAT was hilarious (yes...HILARIOUS) and fun to watch together.
54
"Netflix, maybe anticipating a backlash, wanted to present itself as the disappointed fan as much as the practical-minded enterprise.” Hmmm ... sure sounds like the AT&T-cancelling-FilmStruck-after-taking-over-Turner playbook.
All Is Suspect.
All Is Corrupt.
Know Exceptions.
4
I am a Netflix junkie and I've never even heard of this show... maybe that's why they canceled it? enough with all the conspiracies.
104
@James I think you have to step outside their lists on a fairly regular basis, the shows they list as available for you, as a viewer, are tailored to things you've watched before.
As far as the Netflix algorithm is concerned, familiarity breeds content. (and I mean that word in both senses) They want you to be contented. They plan your content around whatever it was you had before.
27
" Latino, working-class, gay, nonbinary, military, recovering addicts, immigrants."
Omit military and (white) working class and you have the new Democratic Party. Is this show paid for by the Trump re-election campaign?
12
From the famous Netflix deck, its guide to its employee relations: "The actual company values, as opposed to nice-sounding values, are shown by who gets rewarded, promoted, or let go." No surprise here.
8
No idea about this specific show but agree that Netflix isn't my friend. I'm not sure if it's because I live in Hawai'i but seemingly very few of the recent (last few years) films I want to watch are available for streaming. Rather, they're loaded with their own products, most of which I can do without.
4
All valid points, but as an aside, we need an article about the absurdity of Nielsen ratings, which have been barely reliable for decades.
36
This is a shame. I watched the original series as a teenager and loved it so I tuned in when I saw there was a remake. I had very low expectations but was pleasantly surprised. It is a very good show. I don't think Netflix ever publicized it as much as some their other shows. I, for one, will miss One Day at a Time.
76