Stephen Battaglio | Los Angeles Times (TNS)

When ABC’s enduring medical drama “Grey’s Anatomy” made its debut in March 2005, Netflix was still a DVD-by-mail company. There were plenty of pagers but not an iPhone in sight when viewers met Meredith Grey and the show’s first set of surgical interns.

This week, “Grey’s” finishes its 20th season with apparently no end in sight for the crew at Grey Sloan Memorial Hospital. Star Ellen Pompeo announced at Walt Disney Co.’s recent advertiser presentation that “Grey’s Anatomy” is the Burbank, California-based entertainment giant’s most streamed program globally.

To date, the signature series from producer Shonda Rhimes has garnered 3.2 billion hours streamed on Disney services Disney+, Hulu and Star+ around the world.

“Grey’s Anatomy” is also a powerful draw on Netflix, which has been its streaming home in the U.S. since 2009. In March, the streamer started sharing the series with Hulu, which now offers the entire library and carries the newest episodes. The recently completed Season 20 arrives on Netflix in the fall.

“Grey’s” is a prime example of what has long been the not-so-secret sauce that helped propel Netflix’s success. Although new original series and movies are often what lure viewers to the service, audiences end up immersed in the libraries of established programs that got their first exposure on traditional cable and broadcast TV.

“Grey’s Anatomy,” renewed for a 21st season on ABC, has 430 episodes, making it a binge-viewing mother lode.

Nielsen’s ranking of last year’s most streamed programs showed eight of the top 10 series were long-running hits from broadcast and cable networks. “Suits,” which originally aired on USA Network from 2011-19, was No.1, while the CBS stalwart “NCIS” ranked third. “Grey’s Anatomy” was fourth with 38.6 billion minutes viewed.

Nielsen in a January report suggested library shows may have benefited from a shortage of new content to binge throughout much of 2023 due to the strikes by writers and actors that halted production for months.

Although companies such as Disney are stingy with detailed information on their streaming audiences, Nielsen data indicates that Hulu has recently given “Grey’s” a boost. During the last three weeks of April, “Grey’s” was the third most streamed program, just behind the new original series “Fallout” on Amazon’s Prime Video and the animated phenomenon “Bluey” on Disney+.

Veteran network executive Mark Pedowitz, who ran Disney’s TV studio when “Grey’s” launched, said the series was made for binge watching, the viewing method of choice for younger audiences. Streaming has provided a way for generations to bond over the series.

“The women who first discovered the show are now watching with their daughters,” said Pedowitz.

Related Articles

What to watch: ‘Violent Nature’ more than lives up to its name

‘Couples Therapy’ review: The least cynical reality show on TV. This time there’s a throuple.

What to stream: Embark on guided tour of world cinema with Mubi

What to stream: Catch up with Zendaya’s big 2-movie start for 2024

National Memorial Day Concert to mark 35 years of honoring those who died in service to country

When “Grey’s Anatomy” first emerged, it attracted massive audiences on ABC, including 38 million viewers for a post-Super Bowl airing in 2006. But highly serialized dramas of that era that required habitual viewing tended not to perform well in repeats, limiting their value in the syndication market.

That changed as technology gave viewers more ways to watch on demand. Once the digital video recorder gained wide consumer acceptance, “Grey’s” often ranked among the most played-back shows. Remember TiVo? “Grey’s Anatomy” was the most watched show on the device in 2010.

Nonetheless, “Grey’s” nearly got caught in the financial squeeze that can end long-lasting hits. Salaries for its stars had risen while ratings were taking a dip, as tends to happen with aging shows. There was talk inside ABC during the 2013-14 season about wrapping up the series.

But executives ultimately realized the show was a victim of the systemic decline in linear TV audiences, as younger viewers started cutting the cord and migrating to streaming video. Today, they are the audience discovering “Grey’s Anatomy” on Netflix and Hulu.

Younger viewers sometimes respond to past seasons of the show on social media as if it were brand-new. A quick search on TikTok turns up reactions to plot points that occurred years ago, such as the death of T.R. Knight’s character, George O’Malley, in Season 5.

Disney Television Group President Craig Erwich isn’t surprised.

“New fans continue to be drawn to timeless stories of high-stakes medical cases, original and relatable characters and deeply romantic stories,” he told The Times. “And the world they see in ‘Grey’s’ is the world they are growing up in.”

©2024 Los Angeles Times. Visit latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Amanda Hernández And Jennifer Shutt | Stateline.org (TNS)

Groups that assist crime victims across the United States are bracing for significant financial pain after the amount available from a major federal victim services fund plunged $700 million this year.

Congress recently lowered spending to $1.2 billion from the fund, which provides grants to nonprofit and local programs across the country.

This latest round of cuts has sparked widespread concern among district attorney’s offices, rape crisis centers, domestic violence shelters, child advocacy centers and law enforcement agencies that offer victim support services. Many of these organizations and agencies now expect to have to close locations, lay off staff and cut back on services.

Meanwhile, the drop in dollars has many experts and advocates rethinking the current, uncertain system of helping crime victims. How much federal money is available every year is determined by a complex three-year average of court fees, fines and penalties that have accumulated — a number that has plummeted by billions during the past six years. The fund does not receive any taxpayer dollars.

Karrie Delaney, director of federal affairs for the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, said the slowdown of court cases during the COVID-19 pandemic and the last administration not prosecuting as many corporate cases has affected the fund more than usual.

RAINN is the country’s largest anti-sexual-violence organization. It operates the National Sexual Assault Hotline (800-656-HOPE) alongside local organizations and runs the U.S. Defense Department’s Safe Helpline. It “also carries out programs to prevent sexual violence, help survivors, and ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice,” according to its website.

“I think what’s important from RAINN’s perspective is the actual impact that those fluctuations have on the survivors that we support and organizations and service providers across the country,” Delaney said.

When the federal cap decreases, she said, organizations that support crime victims often turn to state and local governments to make up the gap. And a lot of the times there isn’t enough money to do that.

Victim services providers say that smaller groups or branches, particularly those in rural towns or counties, are at an especially high risk of closing because of the expected cutbacks. Many rely solely on federal dollars.

Shakyra Diaz, the chief of federal advocacy with the Alliance for Safety and Justice, which advocates for crime victims, said many groups are “seriously in a situation where they may have to close their doors, they may have to cut services, they may have to cut staff, they may have to tell crime victims, ‘I cannot help you right now. You have to wait six months.’”

In at least three states — California, Colorado and Maine — state legislators have proposed bills that would create new avenues for state-based funding for victim services. A couple of bills would inject general state dollars into victim services to offset the federal cuts, while one would create a new tax on firearms and ammunition, and yet another would increase criminal penalties on corporations. The money collected from taxes or fines would then go toward supporting victim services.

The federal crime victims fund gets its money from fines, forfeited bonds and financial penalties in certain federal cases.

The year-by-year uncertainty around how much money will come from federal crime cases, which directly affects how much will be available to states to distribute to victim services providers, makes it challenging for groups to budget over the long term.

“Services for victims and resources for victim services are already so tight. And so when you’re talking about taking a pot of money that’s already stretched at its best and making it smaller — it’s frankly terrifying,” said Renée Williams, the executive director of the National Center for Victims of Crime.

The federal fund was established in 1984 under the Victims of Crime Act, known as VOCA. Congress tried to stabilize the fund in 2000 by setting an annual cap on withdrawals. The cap remained below $1 billion a year until 2015, but Congress raised it to $2.3 billion that year, and in 2018 it peaked at $4.4 billion.

But in fiscal year 2023, Congress lowered it to $1.9 billion, according to data from the U.S. Department of Justice.

Then, the cap plummeted, and by fiscal year 2023, Congress had set it at $1.9 billion, according to data from the U.S. Department of Justice.

This past March, Congress again lowered the cap, to $1.2 billion, a drop of more than 35%. The cuts will not take effect until October of this year, when the federal government’s next fiscal year begins.

Victim services groups say that the demand for help has continued to surge. Some anticipate the grant process to become even more competitive.

They’re asking state lawmakers for help.

State legislation

For Stand Up Placer, a nonprofit dedicated to supporting survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault and human trafficking in Placer County, California, the anticipated federal cuts are expected to slash about $700,000, or 22%, of the group’s budget, according to Cheryl Marcell, the organization’s CEO.

Some of the group’s services, such as legal counseling, are likely to be scaled back. Instead of serving the current caseload of 500, the group may only be able to accommodate 200 clients, Marcell said.

In California, local district attorney’s offices are grappling with how to address this funding shortfall, according to Jonathan Raven, assistant CEO of the California District Attorneys Association and former Yolo County chief deputy district attorney.

Offices are considering options such as laying off staff, requesting local funding or scaling back services altogether, Raven told Stateline.

“The people that are victimized that are the most vulnerable are no longer going to get the services that they should expect and they do deserve,” Raven said. “It’s really going to be a significant impact across California and across the country.”

State legislators in California have proposed two bills aimed at mitigating the federal cuts.

One of the bills would require state supplemental funding whenever the federal VOCA award is reduced more than 10% than the amount awarded the prior year. The bill is in committee.

The other bill, which is still under consideration in the Assembly, would increase fines levied on corporations convicted of misdemeanor and felony offenses. These fines would be used to fund a new California Crime Victims Fund.

In Colorado, the legislature passed a bill proposing a more permanent state funding source for victim services through a 9% gun and ammunition excise tax. The tax revenue would be spent on crime victim support services, mental health services, school safety and gun violence prevention.

The bill is now headed to Democratic Gov. Jared Polis, who has until June 7 to sign or veto it, according to his press secretary. If he signs it, the measure will go before voters on the November ballot.

Meanwhile, in Maine, Democratic Gov. Janet Mills signed a budget bill in April that includes a one-time allotment of $6 million for victim services.

Effects on services for victims

There are about 12,200 victim services providers in the United States, with nearly a quarter of them located in the country’s most populous states — California, Florida, Texas and New York, according to the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics’ 2017 census.

Ohio has more than 400 victim services providers, many of which receive funding from the federal crime victims fund. Last year, the state received $46.6 million.

But for fiscal year 2024, Ohio has been awarded just $26.7 million, a 42.8% decrease from 2023 and a 77% decrease from 2018.

Related Articles

Third fatal shooting of officer in Minnesota is most in state in 40+ years

St. Paul shooter acquitted due to mental illness

Minneapolis officer killed in ambush joined law enforcement to ‘save lives’

Ex-Viking Everson Griffen charged with DUI, drug possession after traffic stop in Minneapolis

Minneapolis shooting leaves 3 dead, including police officer and suspect

With such a steep cut, some victim services providers in Ohio fear they will no longer be able to serve rural communities, particularly those in the Appalachian region. For the Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence, a statewide coalition that supports rape crisis centers, losing funding could reduce its support to the 12 counties that do not have local rape crisis centers or programs.

“It’s the places that already don’t have great access to services and that have never had access to services [that] will be the ones to have whatever access they have further reduced,” said Emily Gemar, the group’s director of public policy.

Court-appointed special advocate programs in Appalachian counties also are expected to bear the brunt of the funding cuts, according to Doug Stephens, the executive director of Ohio CASA, which oversees 47 local programs covering 60 counties that support children navigating the court system. Stephens anticipates as many as 10 local programs shutting down.

“They are working very hard to provide the same services as the big cities,” he said in an interview. “The only way they can stay open is with VOCA funding.”

In South Carolina, victim services providers and Republican Attorney General Alan Wilson are urging the state legislature to offset the looming federal cuts. Wilson has requested $15 million, which is just enough money to keep existing services.

The state Senate has proposed a $5 million allotment, while the House has put forward a $3 million proposal. Under either plan, current projects could face cuts ranging from about 15% to 30%, according to the attorney general’s office.

Richland County, South Carolina, Sheriff Leon Lott, whose department receives VOCA funding and employs victim advocates who help people go through the criminal legal system, said the state should offer more support.

“When things like this happen, people just think about dollars. What we see is the real people, we see the feelings, we see the pain and emotions they’re going through,” said Lott, a Democrat. “This loss of funding, I’m afraid, will have a negative impact on the things that we try to do with victims and may end up victimizing them even more.

“If the feds are not going to provide the money, then the state needs to do it.”

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a national nonprofit news organization focused on state policy.

©2024 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

By Barbara Marquand | NerdWallet

After starting a career in engineering in Boynton Beach, Florida, Moisey Abdurakhmanov was renting a home with friends when he decided he wanted his own place.

“I realized I was basically paying somebody else’s mortgage every month,” he recalls.

So when the lease was up, he moved back home with his parents, saved every dime he could and bought a house five months later in January 2021 — “easily one of the best decisions I’ve made.”

Many millennials are taking a similar path to homeownership. About a quarter (24%) of people ages 25 to 33 who bought a home between July 2022 and June 2023 said they moved in directly from a family member’s home, according to a National Association of Realtors’ survey. Last year 29% of people who planned to buy a home in the next 12 months had already moved in with their parents to save money, and another 22% said they’d consider doing so, according to a May 2023 survey by Realtor.com and Censuswide.

With high housing prices and rising mortgage rates, you might think saving for a house will take ages. Moving in with parents can speed up the process and eliminate the headache of synchronizing a home purchase with the end of a rental lease.

But the strategy comes with challenges, no matter how much you like your folks. Here’s how to make it work.

Clarify your savings goals

Before broaching the idea, research the market where you plan to buy, figure out how much home you can afford and set a savings goal.

The two biggest upfront expenses are the down payment and closing costs. Minimum down payment requirements vary by mortgage type. Some conventional loans have minimum down payments as low as 3%, but the more you put down, the less your monthly payments will be. Closing costs range from about 2% to 6% of the loan amount.

Consider taking a first-time home buyer’s class to learn about the process, and consult with a lender or two. When you’re ready to shop for a home, you’ll want to get preapproved for a mortgage. When you’re still months away from house hunting, apply for pre-qualification — a less intense process — to see how much you may be able to borrow and what your monthly payments might be.

Then set a time frame. How long will it take to reach your goal if you move back home?

Discuss expectations — yours and your parents’

Have a conversation with your parents about your goals and time frame. Express your expectations about moving in, and ask them about theirs.

“We can avoid distress by recognizing our own expectations first and then communicating clearly with each other about what we’re hoping for … A red flag for me would be if the parent says yes without any conversation about expectations. That would set up a recipe for ill feelings on the back side,” says Saundra Davis, founder of Sage Financial Solutions, a nonprofit financial education and planning agency in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Give space for discussing pros and cons and how you’ll navigate the challenges, including the emotional ones. Understand that there may be mixed feelings about the new living arrangement. “Very few people feel 100% bad about something or 100% good about something,” says Ed Coambs, a certified financial therapist, fee-only certified financial planner and author of “The Healthy Love & Money Way: How the Four Attachment Styles Impact Your Financial Well-Being.”

Some parents and adult children may feel a stigma about moving back home, but don’t let societal pressures subconsciously drive your decisions.

“I think that the United States as a culture has normalized what we call ‘launching.’ If you look at other cultures and in the Black community, it is not abnormal for our kids to stay home longer,” says Davis, who is also a mindfulness teacher and master certified coach. The “failure to launch” concept can put extra pressure on parents and young adults. “If there is shame, where does it come from? Do we believe it? And does it serve us?” Davis says.

Sort out those feelings and do what’s best for you and your family.

Agree on household responsibilities

“The question is, what does it look like for us as mature adults and family members to live in this space together?” Coambs says.

Will you chip in for household expenses? How much? Will you share groceries? Who will do the shopping? What about cooking and cleaning? Will you call home if you’re going to be out late?

All of these — and more — are up for discussion.

Abdurakhmanov, who moved back home in August 2020, says his folks agreed to let him stay rent-free and fully supported his plan to buy a house. But the transition was still an adjustment.

“When I went from having the freedom to do what I want, when I want, to being under the roof of my parents again, there was a lot of headbutting between how I wanted to live my life and what my parents wanted me to do,” he says. “It was a little rough.”

So they talked.

“I drew some boundaries and told them there were certain things that we would just not argue about anymore … We all agreed to shift our focus and look forward to the future.”

Meanwhile, Abdurakhmanov agreed to join his parents more frequently for family dinners and events. “They had missed spending time with me … They felt I was drifting away from them, and they didn’t like that, which is understandable. I can see where they were coming from.”

Schedule regular family check-ins

Keep communication lines open after you move in. Set a regular time to check in about how things are going.

What’s working well with the living arrangement? What could be handled better? Are you on track with meeting your saving goals? Do you need to adjust the timeline?

It doesn’t have to be a formal business meeting. In fact, these conversations might go better during a meal or a relaxed outing.

Listen and empathize

No matter how well you’ve planned and communicated, occasionally you’ll get on each other’s nerves. Listen and be curious.

“Often we get stuck in our own perspective or what we think is the other person’s perspective,” Coambs says. “When we can insert empathy into the relational dance, oftentimes it can loosen things up and open up new options.”

Then the potential payoff from moving back home is more than a home down payment.

“It can also represent a great opportunity to continue to grow and nurture your adult-to-adult relationship with your parents,” Coambs says.

Abdurakhmanov says living with his folks helped prepare him for his next chapter. “It was a good buffer period for me to reestablish myself and everything about me that I wanted to take forward moving into my own place.”

Barbara Marquand writes for NerdWallet. Email: bmarquand@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @barbaramarquand.

The article Moving Back Home to Save for a House: How to Make It Work originally appeared on NerdWallet.