★★★★★ 0/5

Audience has given Nine its Verdict

The content may have improved on last week but the audience has already made up its mind on Nine's new panel show.

8
Leave a comment

2015-10-16_1519

For those who missed last night’s episode of The Verdict (and by the look of the numbers that’s most of of us) it was an improvement on the atrocious launch a week ago.

Host Karl Stefanovic acknowledged that panellists had to be heard this week, joking that anybody out of line would be banished to the naughty corner.

At this point in time, the show itself is still in the naughty corner, according to the audience.

One of the problems -and only one- the show now faces is that time-poor audiences make up their minds very quickly in a market crowded with content. There are other Thursday shows on offer, there is streaming, there are the shows we have to catch up with because they were played at infuriating times we missed them.

The perception of the first show is that it was so abysmal it was not worthy of a second viewing. While it has Mark Latham on the panel, Nine will find it hard to change that perception. Nine wanted him for robust opinions that attract chatter, but he is at risk of becoming the show’s own albatross.

The conversations last night, albeit more audible, still pushed hot topic buttons that were wrapped up in time for a commercial break. Q & A, which does not seek to be so volatile or simplistic in yes / no debates, is also not as hamstrung by exit junctures. It can ebb and flow with more freeform, giving better time to resolve a debate than having to shut it down.

Having a footballer hold up a t-shirt as a result of a question about t-shirt slogans only struck me as pre-prepared. This costs you authenticity.

But there are also other areas that need addressing. One is the audience, which is predominantly caucasian in appearance, and which appears to have been coaxed to such a point as to applaud the bluntest opinion whatever that may be. Watching from the couch as they applaud extreme opinions I feel like they are simply knee-jerk reactions as a result of a well-paid warm-up man. So I begin to mistrust their judgement, or that they represent me at home.

What happened to the audience questions? At least last week’s were intelligent (an entire segment last night devoted to one raised earlier). Does the show no longer have the time or the trust to engage? In a  “town hall” format like this, the audience is not an add-on. They are part of the conversation.

But the show desperately needs to ditch its ‘game-show’-like countdown in which it bizarrely reveals its “verdict” at the end of the night. Having the audience count down from 5 to 1 like an episode of Wheel of Fortune confirms to me they are simply following directions. I also don’t get why we need a “final verdict” on a question the panellists have discussed across an earlier segment.

The way forward for the show (if there is one) is to continue to make news as it did with a Miranda Tapsell quote about her identity, and Mark Latham admitting he was behind The Real Mark Latham Twitter account. Achieving this as part of natural storytelling, and not as contrived or manufactured, will be a challenge.

I’m not convinced the panellists fit with a Nine audience either.

The biggest problem for the show right now is that the audience has made up its mind.

8 Responses

  1. I don’t watch the morning shows so don’t see Karl often but from what I’ve read and seen, he is more suited to lightweight tonight show hosting.

  2. The Verdict hasn’t been the only panel show to be in the nasty corner. Q&A and both Footy Shows have their fair share of criticisms. The Verdict was set to be controversial from the start so of course its going to upset a lot of people. The Project, The Drum are often representing mostly one side of the argument and lacking a proper debate from both sides. The Verdict hopefully with some fine tuning after a few episodes can be that show to bring in a good quality debate on important issues because we’re lacking that in lot of other panel shows in this country.

  4. The audience clapping and hollering at controversial comments is bad but even worse when Karl is throwing to a commercial. He mentions serious topics like racism and rape and the audience is clapping. Just terrible.

  5. The audience warm up is a huge problem on this show, since when do local audiences “holla” and “hoot” as if it was an episode of Jerry, I found that off putting from the start, plus its kind of very much limited by the fact that they have to break for commercials, you can’t really do Q&A or something like it when you have to cut to break.

    This show is very much ill thought out and ill prepared which is a shame, because I do feel there is room for more shows like this, but the set, host, format, and warm up person are all so wrong

  6. There is no way forward…after last nights figures this will surely either be canned or if they want to keep Karl on side, bumped to 10.30 to see out the remaining six eps.

  7. Kudos to you David for the tireless support especially of local content, but having read this post and one that followed up last week’s; i am not inclined to try the show at all; not even for a segment. Thursday night viewing for me is The Nation with David Speers on Sky. There I get a reasonably balanced (mostly) set of guests and well moderated by Speers. For another wrap up, and a more ‘left’ reading of the issues of the week; Insiders with Barrie Cassidy is the bookend for me as far as sampling an array of views. With Sky and ABC i get that panoply of voices. I appreciate not everybody has Sky, and Sunday morning is not a huge audience, but it sounds like The Verdict is trying to be Q&A; Insiders, The Project, The Drum (which i also like) and any other show that arranges different voices in one sitting. But it sounds awful.

    1. I agree daveinprogress, it sounds just awful. I wasn’t aware it was even on (I rarely watch 9), but Karl S is such a lightweight. And it sounds like it’s brought the screaming audiences from every other ‘live’ show with it. I can’t imagine it attracting too many ‘serious’ guests if that’s the case.

Leave a Reply