Try 60 days of free premium.

Showrunner/Creator/Developed By

kerk wrote a month ago: 1

Have a question to make sure I haven't been making bad edits.

I'm personally most interested in who a showrunner for a given show is. Should this role be listed as "Creator", "Developed By", or something else entirely?

When I previously looked at a couple records I made the assumption that the "Creator" title should be used for that role, but I just looked around again and now I'm not so sure. Separately, it seems pretty clear that whoever had that role for the first season remains listed for the duration of the show, which seems fine.


JuanArango wrote a month ago: 1

Usually there is a distinction between "creator"and "developed by" in the credits of the show, we use whatever the credits are showing us :)

kerk wrote a month ago: 1

Ah of course, I didn't think of that.
I'm often looking at upcoming/in-development shows so I'll follow the most common pattern until they air, or just be less aggressive about adding it prior.



Aidan wrote a month ago: 1

Showrunners aren't credited as such, they're normally listed as executive producers.


tnt wrote a month ago: 2

Showrunner usually bears the function of Executive Producer and credited accordingly. Creator and Developer are somewhat different. Usually Creator is an author of the original idea, upon which the show is based. Developer's function is to adapt (develop, extend) the original idea into a script.

But please, don't add credits based on guesswork. If press release or article doesn't clearly list the creative team, do not try to guess who's who. Wait for official announcement which clearly states the names of the creator/developer/EPs etc.

kerk wrote a month ago: 1

Can do. I will look again at the announcements for the few shows I recently edited and adjust where the announcements are not clear.

Annoying because while most showrunners are Executive Producers, most Executive Producers are not showrunners or otherwise putting much creative input into a series. If I think "this show looks interesting, but who is the creative force behind it?" Executive Producer doesn't answer that question.

But that's irrelevant. Accurate data is accurate data :)


tnt wrote a month ago: 3

I'd also like to see showrunner listed along the creator/developer at the show's main page or highlighted in any other way. In the long run showrunners have more impact on quality of the show than people who originally created it, so knowing them is a plus.


LadyShelley wrote a month ago: 1

tnt wrote:
I'd also like to see showrunner listed along the creator/developer at the show's main page or highlighted in any other way. In the long run showrunners have more impact on quality of the show than people who originally created it, so knowing them is a plus.

Shows can have many show runners, Doctor Who has had close to ten over the course of its life. Even modern shows can have more than one, and unless it's well publicised, there may be no way to tell who a show runner is.


tnt wrote a month ago: 1

LadyShelley wrote:
Shows can have many show runners, Doctor Who has had close to ten over the course of its life. Even modern shows can have more than one, and unless it's well publicised, there may be no way to tell who a show runner is.

I probably should've specified, current showrunner (if we're talking about show's info box). BTW, Doctor Who is a good example of the showrunner's impact :) Or The Walking Dead, having its ups and downs along the succession of four showrunners.


wmulder wrote a month ago: 1

A Showrunner could be credited on the episode level in the guest crew category, just like writers and directors.

Gadfly wrote a month ago: 1

Or they can be listed in the season guides and/or person pages.

If they're not credited onscreen as Show Runner (and they're not, at least in American TV), I wouldn't add Show Runner to crew types. You get into a whole area of "interpretation" and off-screen sources, then. For instance: Kolchak: The Night Stalker. Darren McGavin basically served as a showrunner and executive producer. So did his wife Kathie Browne. But neither one of them were credited as such in either role. Do you go by the onscreen credits, or some well-researched guidebook(s)? How many people have the DVD set, and how many people have the guidebook? Which breaks "ties", the onscreen credits or cast member X saying Y? And so on.


tnt wrote a month ago: 1

Gadfly wrote:
If they're not credited onscreen as Show Runner (and they're not, at least in American TV), I wouldn't add Show Runner to crew types.

On-screen data is not the only valid data source. They're credited in press releases.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/doctor-who-12/chris
http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news/2019/10/05/amc-announces-renewal-of-the-walking-dead-for-an-eleventh-season-at-new-york-comic-con-618415/20191005amc01/

You get into a whole area of "interpretation" and off-screen sources, then.

Any data field could be abused. For example, people tend to add "Creators" which are not credited as such. So what, let's remove the "Creator" crew type, because it's often added on assumption?

Tonks wrote a month ago: 1

I always disagreed with gadfly about showrunner, he's right on principle but press releases and even the people themselves do tell when they are showrunning a show, so we have sources, when we don't, then we don't add, it's not that difficult and we can always correct if people don't understand the difference.

But showrunner, creator and developper are not the same thing. The three categories should (or could) be available so that we could add all three when it exist. For example, charmed (2018) has both developper and creator on credits. The morning show has both creator and developper on credits as well, there's been a few shows lately with both credits for multiple reasons. On a legal point view, both gets money due to the WGA MBA and probably a contract we know nothing about.

I believe knowing who is showrunning at Point T is important and it should be attached to seasons or year depending on the show. I personally add who showruns as a note on shows on our french website. For the arrowverse, for example, it's very easy to tract who was showrunning, same for supernatural etc.



Aidan wrote a month ago: 0

I'm not in favor of adding anything not on-screen. I think there's too much potential for grey areas and I'm also worried about accuracy on shows that aren't fairly recent.

Gadfly wrote a month ago: 1

tnt wrote:
On-screen data is not the only valid data source. They're credited in press releases.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/doctor-who-12/chris
http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news/2019/10/05/amc-announces-renewal-of-the-walking-dead-for-an-eleventh-season-at-new-york-comic-con-618415/20191005amc01/

Any data field could be abused. For example, people tend to add "Creators" which are not credited as such. So what, let's remove the "Creator" crew type, because it's often added on assumption?

On-screen data is not the only valid source, correct, but it has precedence at TVMaze.

https://www.tvmaze.com/faq/14/show-extras

So if on-screen data omits information in a press release, which has precedence in the conflict? Is there a conflict? Or is the press release "adding" to the credits?

The word "Creator" on screen aren't going to disappear on all of the DVDs and reruns. :) Folks can abuse it, sure, but we have a baseline established that (presumably) determines how a conflict is resolved . I never said or suggested that users would abuse the "Showrunner" credit, so I'm not sure where the concept of abuse is coming from.

As I asked above with another example of conflict, "Which breaks "ties", the onscreen credits or cast member X saying Y? " In that case, it would be 1 vs. 5 on the TVMaze list, while with press releases it would be 1 vs. 3.

Gadfly wrote a month ago: 1

Tonks wrote:
I always disagreed with gadfly about showrunner, he's right on principle but press releases and even the people themselves do tell when they are showrunning a show, so we have sources, when we don't, then we don't add, it's not that difficult and we can always correct if people don't understand the difference.

Have we discussed it before? For me, adding it to the crew list as a crew type is a different issue then... well, listing it. Folks want to put it in season guides and person bios, go for it. That's not an abuse. But it's also not a Credited role. If someone wants to add it as an Uncredited crew role on a show/episode's crew list, great: that's what we do with uncredited guest stars. Although i don't think we currently have a way to add uncredited crew.

Whether a showrunner can go in a Show Summary is another matter. The TVmaze data policies seem to suggest not.

Someone who has never watched the show should get a basic sense of what it's about...

The name of a showrunner doesn't tell you what the show is about. But the DPs also say:

The summary should not contain any information that's already available elsewhere on the show page.

The information isn't elsewhere on the show page, but the DP also says it doesn't belong in the Summary. So where should it go?

Otherwise, the "conflict" is if Source 1 omits a crew member, does Source 3 or 5 listing a crew member override the omission or not?

Gadfly wrote a month ago: 0

Aidan wrote:
I'm not in favor of adding anything not on-screen. I think there's too much potential for grey areas and I'm also worried about accuracy on shows that aren't fairly recent.

+1. As TNT notes, there's already "abuse" of people adding Creator when Creator isn't credited. Adding more chances for abuse would inevitably... add more abuse.

Gadfly wrote a month ago: 1

kerk wrote:
Have a question to make sure I haven't been making bad edits.

I'm personally most interested in who a showrunner for a given show is. Should this role be listed as "Creator", "Developed By", or something else entirely?

When I previously looked at a couple records I made the assumption that the "Creator" title should be used for that role, but I just looked around again and now I'm not so sure. Separately, it seems pretty clear that whoever had that role for the first season remains listed for the duration of the show, which seems fine.

Being listed as an Executive Producer or Creator (or whoever) in no way makes it clear that the person is also the Showrunner. Especially for a multi-season show, and with the current U.S. tendency to hand out EP credits like candy at Halloween. :)

Therre is no Showrunner credit on the crew list as of this writing. So the OP is talking about adding a "substitute" role for the "real" role of Showrunner. Whether Showrunner is stated onsceen or in a press release is irrelevant. There's no way on the credit page to clarify why the substitution is taking place. Adding a "substitute" credit and then clarifying it on the season or person page seems unnecessarily complex, and the credit and the explanation aren't directly connected.

Should senior staff add a Showrunner credit? That's up to them. We can discuss sources, and whether lower-precedence sources w/data override a higher-precedence source omitting the data then, when/if that time comes.

kerk wrote a month ago: 2

I'm not really talking about adding anything :) I made a bad assumption that "creator" was mostly synonymous to "showrunner" from having a narrow type of situation in mind, but it's clear to me now.

I do find it annoying that the industry, as you said, now hands out EP credits like candy. Creates slightly more effort to find out who the main person/people behind some series are (for my own knowledge), but I can usually go find the press releases and figure it out. If they don't mention anyone that's a pretty bad sign for a scripted show anyway.

Whether you all want to make it more clear here is up to you :) Too many types of shows and fringe cases out there for me to have an opinion about it.


tnt wrote a month ago: 2

Showrunner entry could be not part of the show's crew credits, but a property of the show/season, to be displayed in the 'Info' box. This way it is not necessary for someone to be credited as Showrunner on-screen, any other valid data source would suffice.

.