Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26247132-20160223183610/@comment-26164766-20160409205410

Skyzy wrote: TheDragonair wrote: Also, both the 100 and TVD belong to The CW network, so if The 100 did something that might affect their longest and one of their most popular so (because Arrow and The Flash have clearly gained more popularity the last few years but TVD is still adn always be a classic), producers really don't want to piss the network off. A nework can pull the plug on a show just because. TVD is probably in the clear about that due to popularity but The 100 isn't. Don't forget Jane the Virgin where they also killed off LGBTQ a couple of weeks before Lexa's death. There's a saying about once is chance, twice is coincidence, three times is a pattern. Now tell me what that says about the Network?

An another article (google: "feministing recent deaths on cw shows matter" by Katie Barnes) about CW's questionable behaviour:

"To say that the CW has handled it badly would be a gross understatement. Rothenberg, after staying relatively silent for weeks, gave an interview to TV Insider to essentially say “sorry not sorry.” It was only after more pushback from fans that Rothenberg published an open letter that finally officially apologized… nearly one month after the episode, and days before a scheduled panel appearance at WonderCon, where he reportedly banned all questions about Lexa. The window for believed sincerity had definitely closed.

''Given this clusterfuck, it is unbelievable that this past Thursday night even happened: The 100 violently executed a man of color [...] And they showed the blood and bullet holes. [...] His death conjured images of police brutality and the casual ways in which black men are chained and executed in this country. Fiction reflecting reality isn’t always a problem, but it is when the loaded imagery lacks commentary or political awareness.''

''With all eyes on their channel right now, one would think there would have been some crafty editing and/or a reexamining of the content in their shows. Apparently that has not been the case, proving once again the need for diversity in writers’ rooms, show running positions, and television executives."''

That was my initial thought as well, especially that they had the two weeks break. They could've edit some stuff out. I cannot believe that it is so hard to polish the material a bit more. If somebody comes with "it was a creative decision" again... at that point it should've been damage control, being smart, not being stubborn, holding onto the "I CAN, so I WILL do this" attitude...

Yeah, it will be interesting to see how the CW recovers from this, or to what extent will they be affected by everything that's going on.

As you said Skyze, third time the same trick is already too old and obvious; and if that's true and indeed that visible, then the network has to do something(implicitly: change stuff for the better), right? Or I'm being waay too optimistic and naive?...