What’s also interesting, and here I’m picking up on Derek’s comments about American Idol being a similarly cross-generational show, is that Doctor Who was directly constructed to compete with ‘shiny floor shows’ in its UK scheduling. It was shaped to compete with reality talent shows, and hold a similar, consensus audience, albeit through a TV drama/genre TV mode rather than as ‘reality TV’. So, although it may understandably be compared to other ‘cult’ shows in the US context (and other Brit dramas), it is actually structured and designed to compete with the likes of ‘Britain’s Got Talent’ and ‘The X-Factor’. Multi-generic TV drama that’s genuinely aimed at everybody, rather than constructed for a series of demographically defined audiences! In the US context, this presumably makes it a very odd TV drama beast indeed (particularly judging from other comments here such as Kristina’s).

The irony is that new Who’s production logic looks very much like a commercial enterprise — it’s partly the product of public service TV in Britain needing to defend its license fee and ‘cultural reach’ by chasing mass audiences, but in a way that simultaneously cannot be seen as too brazenly apeing commercial broadcasters. Hence Who becomes quasi-commercial TV, or hybridised public service television defending itself against commercialised audience-grabbing.

And perhaps an even greater irony is that in different national contexts such as American TV, Doctor Who becomes exactly the type of ‘cult’ or cultish show that it’s been purposely designed *not* to be. There is thus a fundamental mismatch between its textual strategies (as a ‘TV blockbuster’ meant for all ages) and its ‘niche’ identity on BBC America, as well as — I assume — its public perception (or non-perception) as a marginal/subcultural/fannish TV brand. I wouldn’t see American audiences for Who as ‘exoticising’ it, but rather, as almost being called upon to watch and read *against* US paratexts of ‘cult’ or ‘niche’ TV.

What is naturalised in new Who’s UK broadcasting context (its status as flagship TV drama for everyone) is destabilised and potentially denaturalised for American audiences. And a text that works against, or in spite of, a backdrop of almost ‘oppositional’ paratexts (i.e. it’s ‘mainstream’ TV struggling against ‘cultifying’ paratexts) might come to seem even more whimsical!

My husband is British so he grew up on Who, hiding behind the sofa. While watching the latest episode he realized it would matter who the Doctor was or what direction the series went it, he would always like it and watch it. Only this year has my son gotten into it and we all eagerly await the newest episodes together. The two of them have been watching old Who on the netflix streaming.

Everyone else I know who watches it are either those who came to it via PBS (like my brother, who has also introduced it to his kids)or women my age who discovered it recently.

My own kids (3 and 6) are still a bit too young for the show, alas. They can recognize characters and icons (e.g., the TARDIS) from my magazines, books, and DVDs, but even the 6 year-old’s been a bit freaked out on the odd time I’ve tried old and new DW on them!

There have been other opportunities for cross-generational franchise building, but what’s interesting is that the best results for other franchises seem to come from multiplying the texts. Thus, you get several simultaneous versions of Batman (from CN’s Brave and the Bold cartoon through to The Dark Knight and the Arkham Asylum game). Star Wars is another intriguing example. Lots of first-gen fans felt horrified at The Phantom Menace, though Lucas saw it as a sincere attempt to court new 8 year-olds. For the 30-40+ crowd, there are “darker” continuities that they can tap into (e.g., The Force Unleashed game).

Great pt about BBCA demographics. I have no idea. However, I’ve heard the same stories you have from my students: that they hear about it online, or stumble upon it on cable or Netflix (or even YouTube), and dive right in. There’s something about the modes of discovery and fannish consumption now vs. 20-30 years ago that’s surely worth investigating, though I suspect there are similarities as well as the obvious differences of technology.

Interesting take, Derek — it strikes me that the reliance on the show’s long history is what’s behind the show’s anomalous style and audience age. That is, I can’t think of any other decades-old TV franchise historically aimed at kids being revived and being aimed at both kids and their parents (who were once the kids who hid behind the sofa themselves). This is something that strikes me must have been considered a necessity by RTD when conceiving of the new run in 2005, but I haven’t read Matt Hills’ book yet, so I dunno if he covers this — Matt?

I can’t think of any other franchise that’s faced a similar challenge — or, alternately, similar opportunity for cross-generational viewership. I’m curious what the demographics are for the BBC America run; are kids watching Doctor Who in the US at all? Is it just adults? Anecdotally, I’ve had a number of current students who have told me discovered the show (and Torchwood) via Netflix streaming — not BBC America or PBS — and they seem of a qualitatively different kind of viewer than the Whovians of my youth.