Lucky 7 canceled: Worst ABC TV show debut in history

Lucky 7 canceled: A show about seven lottery winners, 'Lucky 7' is the first new fall TV show to be canceled.

(Photo by Vince Bucci/Invision/AP, File)
"Lucky 7" cast and crew, from left, Darryl Frank, Justin Falvey, Jason Richman, David Zabel, Lorraine Bruce, Matt Long, Luis Antonio Ramos, Isiah Whitlock, Jr. and Anastasia Phillips. The ABC drama was the first television show of the new season to be cancelled.

“Lucky 7″ has been pulled from ABC’s schedule, and will be replaced by repeats of “Scandal.”

TheWrap noted Wednesday that the lottery drama had the lowest average ratings of any new show in the fall, and the lowest of any Big 4 show overall. “Even the most nervous gambler would have to bet on “Lucky 7″ to be the first show to be canceled in 2013-14,” we said.

Though the show shared a night with “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.,” an early fall hit for ABC, it mustered only an unlucky .7 rating Tuesday in the key 18-49 demographic.

That was down from its debut, which was the worst for a drama in ABC history.

The failure of “Lucky 7″ to thrive suggests ABC’s plan to build Tuesdays around “S.H.I.E.L.D” hasn’t worked out, so far.

On Tuesday, “S.H.I.E.L.D.” at 8 had a 3.1/10 — down 34 percent from its splashy debut — and 8.4 million total viewers. At 9, “The Goldbergs” had a 2.2/6, down 29 percent in the demo, and 6.2 million. “Trophy Wife” at 9:30 had a 1.4/4 — down 39 percent — and 4.3 million. Last week, “Lucky 7′s” 38 percent dip gave it an .8/2 rating with 2.8 million total viewers.

ABC is losing viewers with each Tuesday show — and “Lucky 7″ has the misfortune to be last in line.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.