• by Ed Martin , January 13, 2012

Today, for the second time in four months, a highly distinctive broadcast television institution that has entertained tens of millions of people for more than four decades will come to an end, cancelled to make room for a cheaper-to-produce reality program, the likes of which can be accessed on a number of basic cable and digital channels at any time.

“One Life to Live” -- like so many other daytime dramas a show that over the years fell victim to executive micro-managing, questionable audience measurement, unremarkable writing and a failure to stay appropriately contemporary -- will have its last telecast this afternoon, and broadcast television will not be the better for it. Like the recently departed “All My Children,” “OLTL” is one of the now-legendary ABC soap operas that came along in the ‘60s and ‘70s and revitalized both its genre and its daypart with modern, imaginative stories that separated them from the many daytime dramas on CBS and NBC. In the’80s, all of the soaps on both of those networks would borrow liberally from the ABC shows in their own efforts to become contemporary and relevant to the daytime audience, which was as always predominantly female, but had grown in popularity at the time with teenagers, college students and young men.

That’s almost over now. After today, “General Hospital” will be ABC’s only soap opera, and its future is in distinct jeopardy with Katie Couric’s new talk show rumored to occupy “GH” time periods when it debuts in September. (Elsewhere, only three other broadcast soap operas remain: CBS’ “The Young and the Restless” and “The Bold and the Beautiful,” and NBC’s “Days of Our Lives.”) It would seem that a reprise for “GH” will come only in the form of an unlikely quick cancellation for “The Chew,” the food show that replaced “All My Children,” or “The Revolution,” the weight-loss and lifestyle transformation program that will debut in “OLTL’s” time periods on Monday.

On “The Revolution,” a team of five “experts” in the areas of emotional and physical health, fitness, fashion and design will help overweight women (and the occasional man) in need of help with all or most of the above. Each week the progress of one person over a period of five months will be revealed over five days. Their accomplishments will be tracked in such a way that home viewers will be able to learn how to tackle their own issues while watching others confront theirs.

As did “The Chew” last fall, “The Revolution” faces a tougher challenge than the typical new daytime program. It doesn’t simply have to attract an audience: It has to face the wrath of millions of viewers (many of them very vocal online) who are predisposed to despise it simply because it is replacing a program they have loved and invested perhaps thousands of hours in during the last four decades. And then there’s the perception problem. What does the sorry state of the unhappy people who turn to the team on “The Revolution” (and other life-transformation shows) say about our society in general? How did previous generations get through life without so many self-help shows, not to mention all those segments on self-improvement and jiffy-quick makeovers that dominate the likes of NBC’s “Today” and ABC’s “Good Morning America”?

As one reporter asked at a recent press conference for this show, “What appeal does [‘The Revolution’] have for a woman who is fairly happy with her life; who is in shape and who knows that skim milk has fewer calories than whole milk?” In other words, what will viewers get out of the show if they’re not miserable and anxious to change their lives?

The “experts” were quick to point out that the show doesn’t focus on or wallow in misery, although that would seem to be somewhat disingenuous, since programming that centers on watching people improve their lives generally features people whose lives need improvement.

More to the point, are the people who want (or need) to watch such stuff and are meant to learn from it people that advertisers covet? I suppose that depends on the product in play. Say what you will about soaps: Most of them, including “All My Children” and “One Life to Live,” featured strong female characters that may have been occasionally victimized but were nobody’s victim. At their best (which was a while ago) they were engaging and inspirational and, as such, very effective environments for advertising. There have always been and continue to be plenty of lessons to be learned from watching well-written and well-acted soap opera characters deal with the challenges they face, especially as they relate to relationships, self-improvement and personal growth. But soaps were first and foremost entertainment programs. “The Revolution” is going to have to work awfully hard to entertain as well as inform if it has any hope of survival.