They say Christmas and Easter “come earlier” every year, yet it now seems April Fools Day has joined that list.
The Daily Mirror have published a new article on Doctor Who, so poor in quality that some have suggested wholesale changes are needed at the newspaper and somebody should be sacked over the astounding inaccuracies in the piece.
Reporting that the show will ditch it’s “edgy new style to try to fix its drastic ratings slide” and that Series 8 had been criticised for airing too late and having “complicated and boring stories,” the article cites no sources for these claims beyond claiming “fan sites are awash with criticisms.”
Presumably these same sites don’t feature any positivity at all!
While Series 8 saw the average rating for the series fall to its lowest since 2005, the average rating of 7.4m, the BBC have already publicly stated their happiness at the still excellent ratings, saying the following in November:
“Series 8 saw Peter Capaldi take up the iconic role of The Doctor, with an average consolidated audience of 7.4m viewers every week in the UK. This an increase of 39% on the overnight figures reported the day after broadcast. This includes the 9.2m average audience that watched Deep Breath, Peter Capaldi’s debut episode, which is the highest figure for a non-special episode (Christmas/50th anniversary) since the opening episode of series 5 (Matt Smith’s debut) in 2010. These figures show how Doctor Who has consistently achieved big audiences across the last three series – series 7a/7b combined had an average consolidated audience of 7.4m, series 6a/6b attracted 7.5m and series 5 was viewed by 7.3m. There has been over 18.9m requests to watch Doctor Who series 8 on BBC iPlayer – an average of 1.6m requests for each of the 12 episodes.”
Amazingly the article claims that fans are calling for the “return of the Daleks and Cybermen” despite the Daleks returning to the show in Into the Dalek and the Cybermen featuring incredibly prominently in the Series 8 finale Dark Water/Death in Heaven (just 56 days ago), three episodes that featured in and were reviewed by The Mirror.
The article reaches it’s nadir by referring to showrunner Steven Moffat as “Steven Moffatt” no less than three times throughout the piece and it’s spelling of “chemistry” as “chemistr.”
The article, likely sourced by scouring forums or Twitter for a few negative comments to construct a story, is yet another example in a recent trend of negativity from sections of the national press, rarely balanced with the many many positive comments about the show.
The full article can be deciphered Here
Latest News
