Talk:American Broadcasting Company

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Television Stations, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Television stations. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

	Radio Portal This article is supported by the Radio WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article attached to this page and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards. Visit the wikiproject page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This article is part of WikiProject Media, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to media. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Contents 1 Questions from 2002-2003 2 explaining revert 3 Article title 4 Verification of information 5 Request for Overhaul of this article 6 Opposition to chapter title 7 It's "companies" not "company" 8 ABC 9 Parent company 10 Daytime ("One Life to Live") 11 Requested move 11.1 Survey 11.2 Discussion 12 Disney Era 13 Aaron Spelling and his contribution to ABC's success 14 Add most-watched programs of the network per season since 2001-2002? 15 Logos and Idents Gone!!!!!!!!!!!! 16 2004 Presidential Election

[edit] Questions from 2002-2003

I'm unhappy with the page as it currently is. There are literally pages of info on a corporate merger (which never actually took place), and little info on, say, company history (outside of one planned merger). Nothing is mentioned of ABC's ratings through the years, what programs were offered, corporate information, etc, etc.

Right now, the article is dominated by a 1,100 word POV essay. Stuff like:

"accusatory and nasty tone" "The Commission majority was not impressed by ITT's dishonesty, manipulation of the press..."

doesn't belong in this article.

Frankly, much of the ITT stuff could be edited out, as this article concerns ABC, not ITT, a company which did not merge with ABC.

--Firsfron 01:19, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Done, and done. I reduced the ITT mention to all of two short paragraphs, combined that section into a common 1960s section, and shorted the bits about Roone Arledge (that sort of thing belongs in his personal article, not here IMO). There's also a start on a 1970s section (I can't believe there's all that blab about ITT and not one mention of Roots or Happy Days); there's no mention of Fred Silverman there yet because I wasn't sure where he fit in. -lee 09:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think it's an excellent start, Lee. Thanks for the contrib. Looks 100% better already! :)--Firsfron 03:30, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

will this page concentrate on ABC Radio or ABC TV?

Apparently, neither. It seems to be focusing on the corporate history, particularly mergers. If you know anything about ABC's radio or TV programming, please tell us all! :-) --Ed Poor

---

Are the references to American Broadcasting Corporation in this article factually incorrect? --Minesweeper 05:28, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)

I'd say so. ABC was American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. (or in some cases Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.) before its merger with Disney. -lee 10:03, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] explaining revert

The fact that this entity is owned by the Walt Disney Company is mentioned in the article and in the article's catigorization. Therefore, the additions to the see also section are unnecessary. Gentgeen 06:12, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article title

This is the only one of the 3 oldest North American television networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) that has an article by its full name rather than its initials, the reason being dis-ambiguation is needed. However, can anyone discuss ABC network as a logical article title?? Does that name have dis-ambiguation in its meaning?? 66.245.123.24 23:14, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

There are ABC networks in other countries, Australia, e.g., unless American Broadcasting Company is doing harm, it is probably best left. dml 01:35, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Verification of information

A new revision of the logo its scheduled for 2007.

Where did this information come from? This would be major TV news, since the ABC logo is one of the most recognized TV logos. A search came up empty.

[edit] Request for Overhaul of this article

I'm not sure how it happened, but somehow this article has lept from a discusion of ABC to a discussion of an incident which occurred in the 1960's. The ITT affair now dominates this article. I'd like to request that the ITT portions be deleted, shortened, or removed, as this 6 paragraph long section has almost nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I'd rather see a discussion of ABC's programming throughout the years, etc.

[edit] Opposition to chapter title

The chapter about the absorption of Capital/ABC into Disney is named 'Merger with Disney'. The Walt Disney Company did not merge with Capital/ABC, Capital/ABC became a part of The Walt Disney Company. Can anyone think of a better name than this? Speedway, 19:23, 25 Jan 05

In today's world of finance, that distinction is really no longer meaningful. 18.26.0.18 21:33, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Technically, Disney and CapCities/ABC did merge. A new company was created and incorporated when the two companies combined, although the Disney name was kept.--Plainsong 02:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] It's "companies" not "company"

The corporate name is still plural.

[edit] ABC

What about information relating to the Australia ABC?

Well, our ABC (I'm Australian, you see), does have its own article, and as I often relish in pointing out, the proper ABC (sorry, I'm getting carried away with this), that is, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (originally Australian Broadcasting Commission), was established in 1932, 11 years before the American one, so why isn't our's more well-known? Because the American one comes from the US, doesn't it? You just don't care whose feelings you hurt...

Cyvros, a bloody proud Australian

[edit] Parent company

NBC now has a parent company of NBC Universal and CBS now has a parent company of CBS Corporation. Any stories yet about the future of this network being part of a parent company called "ABC something"?? Georgia guy 02:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Daytime ("One Life to Live")

I edited the blurp about One Life To Live. It seems too POV to me. Yes, it was socially conscious, but it didn’t really make ABC daytime "a success" (like the previous passage stated). It actually got low/mediocre ratings in its early days. OLTL didn’t become a ratings winner until the early ‘80s. And why single it out from all the others when discussing the daytime lineup? It makes no sense.

[edit] Requested move

ABC (United States) → American Broadcasting Company – Page moved today by an inexperienced (and brand-new!) editor unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies, including the idea that the title of the article about a company should generally be the actual name of the company. I left a message for the user, as have others who noticed some other strange page moves, but the damage has been done. Also causes many double redirects. Please fix Crumbsucker 11:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support - It's the companys name and there are thousands of pages which link to the proper name rather than here. -Ladybirdintheuk 15:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support - This page was moved to "ABC (United States)" without consensus and without regard for the actual name of the company. People will search for "American Broadcasting Company", not "ABC (United States)". Ridiculous and harmful move which has caused countless double redirects, none of which were fixed by the editor who moved the page, despite the warning that such a move might cause double redirects. Judging from this user's talk page, he has been moving many controversial pages like this. I've temporarily removed the notice at the top of the article, because it makes no sense in the context of the current page, but will happily replace it when this article is moved back.--Firsfron of Ronchester 16:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support - Acronyms should always be expanded, except in very rare circumstances (i.e. SPAM), or where it has become part of a larger term (i.e. RCA connector). I would ask an admin to make this a "speedy move" since it was done improperly in the first place, and is apparently blocked by an intermediate move.  –radiojon 17:35, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll second Radiojon's request for a "speedy move": I just checked "What links here", and at least 3,000 pages now point to a double redirect page. :( --Firsfron of Ronchester 17:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• Support as per pretty much everyone else. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Fix a mistake, no harm done (not too much). --Dhartung | Talk 07:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

• Please show that the word name is still legally used. Georgia guy 16:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's required. It's certainly not called "ABC (United States)". According to the article, the formal name of the company that operates the network is American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. --Firsfron of Ronchester 16:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disney Era

The 'Disney Era' section and the latter part of the 'Acquisition by Disney' sections are identicle. Should we delete one of those sections? 66.69.244.129 22:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aaron Spelling and his contribution to ABC's success

Especially now with his recent passing, I am surprised that no mention is made of Aaron Spelling and his vast contribution to the fortunes of the network. At one point in time up to a third of the programs on air were from his stable: Charlie's Angels, The Love Boat, Beverly Hills 90210, Melrose Place, etc. etc. They even joked that ABC meant "Aaron's Broadcasting Company" :) -- Jalabi99 06:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Add most-watched programs of the network per season since 2001-2002?

I recently added a table of the most-watched programs of the network of the 2001-2002 season. I meant to include the TV seasons following 2001-2002, up until the present. However, another Wiki user had deleted it shortly thereafter. My question to anyone here is should tables of the most-watched programs per season since 2001-2002 be included? I believe that such an addition is informative and an interesting read. Let me know what you think. -- Dechnique23 00:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logos and Idents Gone!!!!!!!!!!!!

What happened to the logos and idents for ABC?

Response to Q. "What happened to the logos and idents for ABC" - Were there copyright issues involved in posting the older ABC logos? If not, was there suspected vandalism? Or someone affiliated with ABC removed/asked for removal of the logos? lwalt 18:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

There is already an article about ABC logos see: American Broadcasting Company logos. AxG (talk) ^{m. xmas} 18:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2004 Presidential Election

Anyone find that seciton a bit odd? I thought about maybe re-wording it, but I wasn't sure. It seems to critisie ABC for not providing 'equal coverage' to Dennis Kucinich, Carol Moseley Braun and Al Sharpton, presumably compared to candiadtes such as Howard Dean and John Kerry. Since it is widely accepted that the three were 'vanity candidates' who had little to no chance of winning the nomination, isn't it logical for the network to focus more emphasis on more viable candidates who the public are more interested in? It happens every primary season on both sides, notice how Hillary and Obama are getting much more coverage than say, Mike Gravel, etc. --IvanKnight69 12:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)