Are you seriously suggesting that IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes weren’t review bombed globally.
Any rating that has a distribution of 38% 1/10s has no credibility whatsoever, zilch.
And the alleged non US ratings aren’t vettable.
Comment on Nazis Have the Dumbest Star Trek Opinions | Jessie Gender
Abundance114@lemmy.world 2 days agoEven if we filter out the United States, Academy is sitting at a sub 5/10 rating world wide.
If you call the MAGA crtisicms what you want, but after the fact there are plenty of legit ones remaining.
StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 2 days ago
Abundance114@lemmy.world 2 days ago
You think MAGA is inteligent enough.to review bomb foreigner reviewers?
StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 19 hours ago
I am confident that their are overseas bot accounts intervening to magnify cultural and political conflicts in entertainment spaces.
Abundance114@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
But there aren’t any equal amount of overseas bots pushing the other direction?
HetareKing@piefed.social 2 days ago
MAGA is an American thing, but there are plenty of people sharing their dumb opinions outside of the US.
Also, MAGA nutters aren’t actually less intelligent than anyone else, just cowardly and resentful. They don’t want to think about what’s causing the problems in the world, because then they might have to reconsider parts of their worldview and that’s scary. So they want someone to just swoop in and fix the problems without fundamentally changing anything, or failing that, gives them the feeling they have permission from society to lash out against anything they consider “abnormal” and is therefore a potential cause of the problems. And so they’ll resent anyone who criticises them for that or tries to undermine that feeling of societal permission they want or already have.
But not wanting to think about certain things is not the same as being unable to, and any intellectual capacity not spent on actually thinking about real problems and how to solve them can then be spent on how to create the impression that their opinion is dominant and therefore they’re not doing anything wrong.
Anyway, the point is that while there are definitely legitimate criticisms to be had about the newer Star Trek shows, your metric isn’t very useful for demonstrating that. To begin with, why hide behind numbers at all? It just makes it look like you’re trying convince people that your criticisms carry more weight because the world agrees with you.
Abundance114@lemmy.world 1 day ago
why hide behind numbers at all?
Oh, okay let’s keep spending millions per episode so a few thousand people can enjoy the show. That’s absolutely how show business works.
Numbers are critical and a key indicator of mainstream success.
As I’ve stated multiple times already low viewer count combined with high review bombs indicates a disconnect between what’s being produced and what the audience wants.
buerviper@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The alt right is a global movement.
The 1’s are just there to review bomb, and a lot of the 10’s probably to increase the rating. If you look at the other ratings, the bell curve looks to peak somewhere between 7 and 8.
It is polarizing. An average rating does not represent this.
Kirk@startrek.website 1 day ago
ok👍
usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
No one here is complaining about legitimate criticisms.
(But also an aggregated numeric value is not a criticism at all, it’s a reductive metric that means very little and I don’t understand why people ascribe so much value to these things).
Kirk@startrek.website 1 day ago
For the life of me, I’ll never understand the mind of a viewer who gives a shit about aggregated rating scores like that.
Abundance114@lemmy.world 2 days ago
But also an aggregated numeric value is not a criticism at all
How’s that? If 10 of your coworkers rated your job performance as 5/10; would you think that’s not a critical indicator of a failing performance?
How about viewer count, shall we go look that up?
usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
How’s that? If 10 of your coworkers rated your job performance as 5/10; would you think that’s not a critical indicator of a failing performance?
No. I’ve never been evaluated in such a fashion, and I’d resent it if I were. I think my boss should have the competence to judge my work on its own merits. I judge the shows I watch the same way.
I’m confused as to your purpose here. You seem to be arguing that the show is bad because it’s unpopular. Is that how you form all your opinions? Popular vote, no need to think for yourself?
Abundance114@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You seem to be arguing that the show is bad because it’s unpopular.
The premis of the thread seems to be that the show is getting review bombed because of MAGA. I pointed out that filtering out the United States still gives abysmally low scores.
If you look at viewer count (low) and review bombs (high), it seems to indicate that the producers are wildly out of touch with what the majority of the Star Trek audience is about.
ilinamorato@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It could be a terrible indicator of your actual performance, if five of your coworkers rated you a ten honestly, but the other five rated you a zero because they hated the Black Lives Matter sign in your cubicle.
Abundance114@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Yeah and if it had absolutely nothing to do with the black lives matter sign, and the person inserted the black lives matter sign as a defense, that what is it?
Kirk@startrek.website 1 day ago
[deleted]Abundance114@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I rate your comments in this thread 0/100 now please follow your own logic and cancel the entire production.
Irrelevant because I’m not the one trying to sell a product. A rating is a general but not perfect indication of audience acceptance; it should be obvious why someone should care.
If someone review bombs a product it’s because they’re a fan of a previous product, and are massively disappointed in the current offering.
If viewership is low, and review bombs are high, that’s an incredible indicator that the producers don’t understand their audience.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 day ago
nutrek has been bad since STD, paramount needs to stop trying, also being under ELLIson is enough to make people stop supporting it.
Sertou@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Eh, TNG had a rough start too, but became awesome. Note that it took two plus seasons to become consistently good.
Academy has lots of rough spots, especially in the writing, but it is not irredeemable. It just needs time to find its tone and audience.
Abundance114@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
I agree with what you said but I’m kind of confused about this… Like the audience is there, its been there for 30 years. Why would you want to find a new one.
Sertou@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Not every show appeals to every Trek fan.
Just as Enterprise didn’t appeal to me, so Academy won’t to others. But if the show goes on long enough it may attract those trekkers who find appeal in a semi-angsty drama among a college age cast in a progressive academic setting.