Who Shrunk Television?
Well you aren't alone.
We explored a database of TV show metadata from 2000 to 2024 to find out if shows are truly getting shorter—and if they are, why, and who (or what) might be behind it.
Who Shrunk Television?
With the rise of streaming platforms, especially Netflix, there’s been a noticeable shift toward shorter, more “bingeable” seasons. This trend came under sharp focus during the 2023 Writers Guild strike, where writers pointed out that fewer episodes per season meant less pay and fewer opportunities. But beyond the economics, we wanted to explore whether this “TV shrinkage” is real, and if so, what it tells us about broader cultural shifts in how we consume media.
The three main players in this market are critics, networks, and viewers. Join us as we explore data from all three of these sources to investigate the mystery of the shrinking TV show. Ultimately, we hope you bear these points in mind as you reflect on your own feelings about the changes observed.
With claims about the shrinking nature of American television shows abound, the question becomes whether many audience members’ perception of shrinking series is correct. And if correct, what kinds of shows might be subject to this shrinking?
Let’s start with the series that attain critical acclaim — the ones that win one of the two biggest prizes in American television: the Emmy Awards for best comedy series and best drama series.
In fact, it seems that over time, Emmy critics have come out with a resounding message: “Quantity does not equal quality.” Since 2000, awards for Best Drama and Best Comedy have been awarded to series that pump out fewer episodes per season.
But since 2000, there have been thousands of television shows released in the U.S., and those that win Emmy Awards may be too small a population to discern any industry-wide trend. So let’s zoom out.
Every year, Emmy critics pick out eight nominees for Best Drama and eight nominees for Best Comedy. How might episode count look for Emmy nominees? Check for yourself:
While Emmy-nominated shows provide a useful lens into what critics value, they represent just a sliver of what’s actually being produced. To understand whether “TV shrinkage” is a widespread industry phenomenon—and not just a quirk of prestige programming—we need to broaden our scope.
Let’s examine a cross-section of the U.S. television landscape from 2000 to 2024, focusing on six major networks: ABC, CBS, HBO, NBC, Netflix, and Showtime. These networks span both legacy broadcasters and streaming newcomers, and they also happen to be some of the most frequent producers of Emmy-nominated and Emmy-winning shows. By looking at their output, we gain a clearer, more representative picture of how television production strategies have evolved across the broader industry.
The charts below show the average runtime and median number of episodes per season for shows on each network. At first glance, it becomes clear that some networks—particularly streaming services—have moved away from traditional TV formats. Where 20+ episode seasons once dominated, 8–10 episode seasons now seem increasingly common.
Scroll through the following steps to explore which networks have decreased, increased, or maintained their show lengths over the past two decades. Hover over each dot to see the exact number of episodes or runtime for a given network and year.
As we’ve seen, the industry’s turn toward shorter, “bite-sized” seasons (8–10 episodes, instead of 20–24) isn’t a fluke—it’s a calculated move. However, just because critics and producers have begun to follow this pattern doesn’t necessarily mean that consumers’ viewing habits have changed to match.
Let’s dig into the final piece of the TV shrinkage mystery with a dataset of consumer viewership from one of the primary suspects: Netflix. The following graph plots the total weekly hours watched by all global consumers over time for ten English TV shows that spent the longest in the popularity top 10 of Netflix while they were ranked, i.e. any viewership from times when the show wasn’t in the top 10 is excluded.
Use the control panel on the right to customize your view.
As you can see, every new season release (marked by colored dashed lines) triggers a sharp, short-lived peak in global viewing hours. Those peaks are getting narrower as seasons shrink; Instead of a steady trickle of episodes over months, viewers binge 8–10-episode runs in a single week.
Which season releases generated the tallest spike for you? Does a lean 8-episode drop feel more compelling than a sprawling 20-episode roll-out?
This pattern becomes more evident when viewed in terms of total cumulative hours over time from the above data.
Even though shorter seasons pack a punch in one week, their long-term lift flattens out sooner compared to longer seasons. Thus, it seems like short seasons front-load excitement but may plateau faster, leaving less “tail” of ongoing chatter and catch-up viewing.
This brings up the key question: we’ve seen how shorter seasons fire up huge spikes in viewing, then quickly flatline—but are they also more “efficient” at engaging viewers per episode?
To answer that, let’s turn to our final visualization:
The following scatterplot depicts Global Viewing Hours per Season (normalized by episode runtime) vs Season Length (in Episodes) for all shows that were in the Top 10 English TV shows on Netflix between July 2021 and April 2025.
Explore the graph by clicking on points to zoom, searching for your favorite shows, or zooming and panning through to examine the data.
When we plot each season’s total global viewing hours per episode against its episode count, a striking bell-curve emerges:
→ Sweet spot at 8–10 episodes: Seasons in this range consistently hit the highest normalized hours per episode, meaning viewers squeeze the most engagement out of each installment.
→ Too short, too shallow: Mini-seasons under 6 episodes rarely build enough narrative momentum, yielding only modest per-episode returns.
→ Too long, too weary: Once you push past ~15 episodes, normalized engagement drops off sharply—audiences seem to lose steam when seasons stretch on.
→ Outliers underscore the trend: A handful of 9–10-episode seasons even breach the 250 million-hours-per-episode mark, showing just how potent a tightly focused run can be.
After analyzing data from critics, networks, and consumers, it’s clear that television’s shortening seasons aren’t merely an artifact of budget cuts or executive whim—they’re in line with how we, the audience, actually watch.
Across networks and prestige awards alike, median episode counts have fallen from the traditional 20+-episode model into a tight 8–10-episode sweet spot. Our Netflix viewership data confirms why: mid-length seasons generate the strongest per-episode engagement, front-loading binges into single-week spikes while preserving enough narrative room to develop characters and story arcs. Mini-seasons under six episodes and sprawling runs beyond fifteen episodes alike see far lower interest over time.
What does this tell us about viewer behavior?
Quality over quantity: Audiences are happiest when shows hit that 8–10-episode sweet spot—enough time to develop story and characters, but not so long that momentum sputters.
Narrative momentum matters: Mini-seasons under six episodes rarely capture deep engagement, while sprawling runs beyond 15 episodes see per-episode interest taper off.
Binge-friendly pacing: Viewers reward a tight, binge-worthy arc with higher watch-time per episode, signaling a preference for seasons that respect their time and keep them hooked from start to finish.
Ultimately, it seems the crime of “TV-shrinkage” isn’t committed solely by picky critics or cost-cutting networks— it also depends on the viewers. Every impulsive “Next Episode” tap, every weekend binge, sends an unspoken decree to creators: strip away excess, sharpen the drama, and deliver satisfaction instantly. In that light, the true architect of shorter seasons may well be the restless audience itself, with our collective tastes shaping the length of the stories we consume.
Here's our writeup for this project: read it here.