That Star Wars Girl
Geeks and Gamers
Star Trek: Picard's first season had a lot of problems. For instance, the whole premise of Dahj and Soji being Data's daughters when he didn't even build them like he built Lal. The writing and dialogue are so bad in this show that even the once great speeches of Jean-Luc Picard are no more. However, ViacomCBS and the media have been trying to spin the perception of the show and it's obvious.
There are articles that seem to excuse the dark tone of Star Trek: Picard. Articles that have excused the violence, the killing off of legacy characters, and even the constant cursing. I've also noticed articles claiming that Picard "broke records" for CBS all access and is generally welcomed by the audience. I've decided to put that last part about how much the audience likes it to the test and see how Picard did in season one. Keep in mind that CBS does not release their view count, so we must extrapolate using other means. We start with the big picture:
Viacom/CBS stock has plummeted over the last month from $35.67 a share to $11.97. They blame it on the merger, but that was completed by December. Picard premiered January 23rd and the drop in stock price coincides with episode 5, where Icheb was violently tortured, and where Seven of Nine lost all of her character development from Voyager. Now it's been reported that ViacomCBS' parent company had to sign off on a deal with their lender, Wells Fargo, that will restructure their credit while giving up a lot of its power to borrow money. I'm not saying that this is all because of Picard, but I'm sure it's a factor.
Next we go to the Star Trek franchise itself. This comes from Google Trends, which measures interest in a topic by the amount of times people Google it. For instance, this 16 year chart for the term "Star Trek" shows that during the last years of Enterprise, peak interest was over 25% and then dropped when it was cancelled in 2005. It then hit 100% peak interest in 2009, coinciding with the Star Trek 2009 movie. Interest in the rest of the JJ Abrams films then dropped. By the time Star Trek Discovery premiered, interest was below 25% and stayed there.
If you zoom in between 2017 and the present and separate Picard from Discovery, you'll notice that Discovery's premiere sparked 100% peak interest compared to Picard's 28% peak interest. That is a 72% drop in interest between Discovery's premiere and Picard's. Remember, this is all within the under 25% interest for Star Trek in general.
Now what happens when you isolate the chart to just Picard during the time it has aired? An average interest of only 35.5%, according to the chart below. That is within the 72% drop compared to Discovery.
You may be saying to yourself, "Hey not everybody uses Google and they don't constantly Google the same things over and over, this is just one metric and may not be accurate". I can grant that. Which is why there are other ways to indicate falling interest in Picard, such as the falling audience score on Rotten Tomatoes:
Or this article titled "Star Trek: Picard Viewership Plummets Over Half A Million In Canada" where they are actually airing Picard and so must release their ratings. Also, according to Google Trends, Canada is actually the country that most searched for Picard and they STILL lost that many:
How about Picard's after show "Ready Room" continuously dropping in viewership on YouTube, and how Nerdrotic's views often surpassed Ready Room's (7 episodes out of 10):
Or how Nerdrotic's YouTube page has 34,000 more subscribers than CBS All Access' YouTube page:
Not even Parrot Analytics can save Picard as it started with only 55 million "demand expressions" in its first week, and dropped to 41 million in their last week. In their latest chart that ended May 21st, Titans has more demand expressions than Picard. Compared to television overall, Spongebob is way more watched than Picard. Spongebob, the cartoon about a sponge that lives in a pineapple in Bikini Bottom, completely dominates over Star Trek. That's sad.
We even did a random Twitter poll that was open to everyone and the results were similar - the audience for Picard is actually pretty small.
Star Trek Picard obviously did not do well in season one. It's audience was even smaller than Discovery's, the episodes after the first don't even reach 50% peak interest, viewers in Canada are turning off the TV and ViacomCBS' may be forced into bankruptcy. These articles that excuse the violence and cursing in Picard and tell you that the show is doing fine are selling you spin. They sort of have to if they want to continue their working relationship with these studios, not to mention some of these sites are owned by the studios.
So where are you going to get honest opinions on pop-culture? Let me suggest a few YouTube channels that have no affiliation with these studios or the media and will not try and sell you spin:
That Star Wars Girl
Geeks and Gamers
Some may read this article and simply dismiss the seven factors I have presented (Stocks, Trends, RT, Canadian Ratings, YT Views, Parrot Analytics, Twitter Poll) as "horse hockey". They either don't like that the facts presented go against what they wish to believe, or maybe they have some counter facts of their own that they would like to present. If so, please leave these counter facts in the comments below. (Any insults or straw-man arguments that have nothing to do with this article will be deleted.)
San Diego has a lot of bars and clubs and since 2004, the Kava Lounge has been one of them. In a 2011 San Diego Reader article, the Kava Lounge was hailed for their unique drinks, including one particular drink:
"The popular Tipsy Gypsy unites ginger, lime, agave syrup, and vodka or gin. In a clever twist on the classic mojito, the Besito finds crushed basil in place of mint with lemon, lime, and organic vodka."
Sounds good, but what about the word "gypsy"? It's a seemingly benign word that has always been around and is generally defined as a wanderer, or someone with a free spirit. If you look it up however, you learn that they are actually a people from Northwest India who have migrated across the world. They got that name from Europeans who saw their dark complexion and assumed they had come from Egypt. Like other minority groups, they have been the victims of hate and bigotry. 70-80% of them were murdered in the Holocaust and today, many of them generally see the word as a racial slur, preferring the name "Ramani".
Not everybody knows all of that though. Since most people connect it with the other stuff, I could see how people would use the word with innocent intentions. I can believe the drink was innocently named. What I can't believe is how one of the Kava Lounge owners, responded to the idea that they may want to change the name of that drink. The following story comes from one of the people involved and they've kept an extensive PDF full of receipts as proof.
We begin with a simple polite message to the Kava Lounge's Facebook, January 4th:
There was no response to that or a follow up message on January 8th, so on the 28th, a negative review was left on the Kava Lounge's Facebook page:
Apparently this 20 word review triggered Kava Lounge co-owner, Mike Bremer, who responded by messaging the people who wrote and liked the review:
The person Bremer messaged that to is a non-binary, trans-person and doesn't identify as a male. Bremer then made it clear that he was part of the Kava Lounge by responding to the review itself, calling the original poster a "Lesbian dad", rather than addressing the issue:
The unprofessionalism escalated as both the Kava Lounge account and Bremer's personal account began telling people to "go F yourself" and to "fuck off", because attacking customers for pointing out an offensive term on your product is how to run a successful business:
This goes on for days and the longer it went, the more people became aware of what was happening. In this message he sent to someone at 2 A.M. on January 30th, Bremer attempts to dispel the idea that he could hold any bigotry, by declaring that he has a black girlfriend.
So instead of addressing the issue of the drink's name, Bremer took the negative review as a personal insult and started hurling actual insults like a 15 year old Call of Duty troll. If an employee of most businesses did this on their official business account, they'd be gone - but this is an owner. I don't think this is a good way to run a business and I'm left questioning why a person like this would co-own such an establishment if they can't maturely handle criticism. All it did was motivate people to become even louder when calling him out on his actions.
Eventually Kava's other co-owner, Scott Bell, got involved and posted their side of the story on Kava's Facebook page, seemingly defending Bremer's actions as an "insult" and not a "slur".
However, Bell then responded to the original contact, apologizing for Bremer's actions and explaining why they didn't initially respond to their messages. This was a good step. Nobody should be bullied or shamed for calling out a business for ignoring complaints. Bell then issued a full apology on Kava's page. Also very good. Later, Kava announced that they would be discontinuing the drink in question.
By February 1st, Bremer posted an anemic statement on his page, full of the same bad spelling, grammar and high school level insults you've come to know from his previous comments. He said he was leaving the Kava Lounge:
Notice that the comments section was full of slurs and threats. Evenually, Bremer begins joking about renaming the drink "lazy lesbian" and "Uptight fag":
This would seemingly be where everybody lived happily ever after - except for Bremer. In one last flaccid attempt to get the upper-hand, he hired a lawyer who is sending people legal notices, threatening to sue them for libel and slander if they don't remove their posts about the Kava Lounge being anti-LGBTQIA.
So first of all, I thought Bremer left the Kava Lounge, so why would this lawyer be representing them both if he supposedly left? Did he lie? Is Bell aware or apart of this at all?
Also, nobody tricked Bremer into saying any of these things. He volunteered it himself after the issue of the drink was politely pointed out. I don't know this guy or his heart, but his actions certainly speak for themselves:
So if Bremer wants to sue the people he attacked because they say he and the Kava Lounge are anti-LGBTQIA, he has to first address why he attacked LGBTQIA people with insults and slurs in his official capacity as co-owner. I'm curious to see how far Mr. Bremer wants to take this. He wants to turn this into a big deal now, when all he had to do was what co-owner Bell did and maturely address the issue of the drink.
Why do we need all that drama in our lives though? San Diego has a lot of bars and clubs that will actually handle your concerns without resorting to calling you names and attempting to sue you. Go to those other places instead. Screw this place.
If you're curious about source, I've provided the PDF for download.