Why Tom Selleck’s Blue Bloods Was Canceled By CBS
The term “copaganda” gets tossed around way too much when talking about films and television shows that center on the lives of law enforcement professionals. Series like “The Wire,” “The Shield” and “Justified” were, to differing degrees, nuanced in their portrayal of the good, bad, and utterly reprehensible behavior of the people tasked with keeping the peace in communities of all shapes, sizes, and demographics. They drove home the importance of getting collars and prioritizing closeable cases. They showed how deeply ingrained the practice of racial profiling is in Black and Brown neighborhoods. The characters who walked the razor-thin line of doing good and committing evil could frequently seduce us into laughing off their indiscretions, but there was usually a price to be paid for these actions — or, at the very least, a lack of approval from the writers.
Because sometimes artists respect viewers enough to trust that they won’t take their depiction of complex, sometimes likable characters behaving badly as an endorsement.
It’s important to make this distinction because there is “copaganda” out there. On television, for the last 14 seasons, there hasn’t been a series more dedicated to taking the side of the fuzz come hell or high water than CBS’ “Blue Bloods.” The cop series about the Reagans (ahem), a cop family that unapologetically does cop stuff because being cops is, as the title screams, branded in their genetic code. Starring Tom Selleck, Donnie Wahlberg, Michelle Moynahan, Will Estes, and Len Cariou, the show believes in the inherent decency of the people who carry a shield and a gun — god forbid they ever have to use the latter.
The show was a fairy tale, but there’s an audience out there that unabashedly cheers for cops, and, judging from the Nielsen ratings, “Blue Bloods” is their network fantasy of choice. So why the heck did CBS, a non-ideological company obsessed solely with the bottom line, cancel the series when it was still going strong?
Why cancel a perennial top 10 show?
There really isn’t a good answer for this!
While I’m not a fan of the show in the slightest, I understand star (and our former mustachioed lord and savior Magnum P.I.) Tom Selleck’s frustration at watching his very successful series get kiboshed by the network — the second part of the final season begins airing October 18, 2024 — when it’s long been one of their most reliable ratings performers.
According to Amy Reisenbach, President of CBS Entertainment, it was just the show’s time to die. “We love this cast, we love their passion for the show,” she said. “All shows have to come to an end. It’s important to us to refresh the schedule. We are going to end the show come December.” Selleck doesn’t want to hear it, especially when the show hasn’t lost much of a step ratings-wise. As Selleck told TV Insider:
“During those last eight shows, I haven’t wanted to talk about an ending for ‘Blue Bloods’ but about it still being wildly successful. In a Top 100 Shows of 2023-2024 (in total viewers, we were number 9 out of 100), if you discount the three football shows, we’re #6 ! If you were to say to the television network, ‘Here’s a show you can program in the worst time slot you got, and it is going to guarantee you winning Friday night for the next 15 years,’ it would be almost impossible to believe. My frustration is the show was always taken for granted because it performed from the get-go.”
Is there a next iteration of Blue Bloods in the offing?
Nevertheless, CBS remains adamant that this is the end of the line for “Blue Bloods.” But CBS Studios President David Stapf, in a July interview with Deadline, made it clear that they understand the value of the show as a brand. So while they don’t have anything cooking in terms of a spinoff, the pilot light is still flickering. According to Stapf, “We’ve got to get it right so we’re taking our time and trying to figure it out, okay, what is the next iteration of ‘Blue Bloods?’ We have a whole season to go where we intend to celebrate it all season long as to how good that show is, so there’s still time for us to figure that out.”
I have no use for the show, but if I were in Stapf’s position, I’d just keep renewing “Blue Bloods” until the ratings tank. A reboot or spinoff seems unnecessary, if not dumb. Just give this viewership the copaganda they want. As Selleck says, it gives you a one-hour block in the schedule that you don’t have to worry about.
