Discuss how you see two of John Caldwell’s five elements of convergence television (outlined on page 46 of his essay) applying to the television you consume today.
The television that is consumed today applies many of John Caldwell’s elements of convergence television, however, what sticks out most to me would have to be programming textuality and ritual textuality. Ritual textuality involves the social performance of show making that starts with the authors, which Caldwell notes as being the “industrial actors” (p. 57). The pitch is referred to as performance art where “writers must hook a producer/buyer/executive’s attention in a matter of second with the promise of something original” (p. 58). Most television shows that are pitched today follow the “just-like-but-very-different” approach, with examples like Pee-Wee’s Playhouse being pitched as “Mister Rogers on acid” (p. 58). Moreover, there seems to be a “committee-mode in TV that attributes the plot line, characters and overall narrative to a team of multiple writers, which can often times “‘punch-up' the scenes” (p. 59). Applying this concept of ritual textuality to the television that I consume today, I would have to say that I find most of these concepts working in favor of the shows that I find myself keeping up with each week. For example, the show Homeland, could be considered a same-but-different play off of the hit West Wing; both shows involve a close look into government relations, however with obvious differences. Programming textuality is considered includes the practices of stunting and sweeps weeks. Sweeps weeks (November, February and May) are selected weeks in which "networks establish advertising rates for the months that follow based on Nielsen ratings calculated during the sweeps” (p. 61). Stunts, “special episodes of series are frequently aired to attract a higher-than-represntative audience and so ‘spike’ ratings” during sweeps weeks (p. 61). The most widely used stunt that I have recognized in the television that I watch today is definitely the cross-genre guest-star stunt in which important, famous and/or lead characters in one show, will appear in another popular show, of which they are not in the regular cast. While no particular show comes to mind, every time I see advertisements for this cross-genre guest-star stunt I find it to be very exciting and kind of “cool” in a way. I like how it brings different shows together, and to me it makes the programs seem that much more real in a way because you see fictional characters that before, you did not think "knew about each other," but now appeared on the same screen. I think that this kind of stunt is very beneficial for the television that I consume today because it makes the programs that much more interesting, especially in a day and age where stimulation is crucial to entertainment.
Alex! I liked that you chose to focus on Caldwell’s element of programming textuality, specifically the use of “stunts,” such as the cross-genre guest-star stunt. The television I consume today most definitely uses this aspect of convergence TV in order to attract a higher than usual audience and to boost ratings as well. I think Law & Order: SVU would be a great example of this; the show keeps the same central cast, however, each episode features different actors as the victim and district attorneys, along with other minor roles within the show’s narrative. Although the episodes do not always feature a celebrity guest-star, they tend to use them quite frequently. As noted by the Huntington Post, as of July 2013, Law & Order: SVU has featured a total of 219 celebrity guest-stars, including teen pop stars and Oscar winners. Therefore, it is interesting to note that these celebrities are generally not featured on TV; a majority of the guest-stars are celebrities from another kind of media sector such as film/movies or even music artists. Sometimes specific episodes will feature multiple celebrities, such as the time Carol Burnett and Matthew Lillard starred in the same show. Additionally, Law & Order episodes have been inspired by celebrity stories; that being said, they do not have the actual celebrities star in the show. The most common example of this would be when one of the fairly recent episodes was based on Chris Brown physically abusing Rihanna. I think this would also be something to consider when thinking about Caldwell’s elements and how they apply to the TV we watch today!
Well, just recently, History, A&E, and Lifetime all contributed to broadcast Bonnie and Clyde. Frist of all, this is a big stunt to try and draw audiences to these three networks. Commercials constantly define this event as “EPIC.” But what is “EPIC” about this program? Nothing I would say. It’s not like there hasn’t been programs like Bonnie and Clyde before. The one thing that makes this “EPIC” is the fact that it’s going to be broadcast over three networks. Keep in mind that all three networks are owned by A+E Networks.
Either way, what’s spectacular is the amount of work they put into making the program seem spectacular, “EPIC.” Apart from its two-night television life, there is more to be found online. This program is promoted on each of the networks websites. They offer behind-the-scene content from program with the creators and actors commentary. They offer information about the cast playing the characters. In A&E’s site, they even have Facebook and Twitter feeds that show what people said about the program. This “EPIC” coming together of networks doesn’t just stop on the television screen, but it lives on in each of their websites. The program maybe more or less good, but the effort put into making us believe it’s going to be “EPIC” is epic.
I think each of Caldwell’s five points about convergence television are present in TV today, but I immediately thought of examples for conglomerate textuality and programming texuality. Conglomerate textuality is the converging of TV shows with the Internet via websites about the show, for the viewers. Caldwell writes that, "The most effective Web sites for TV succeed by keeping viewer-users engaged long after a series episode has aired, and this requires greatly expanding the notion of what a TV text is" (51). The example that sprang to mind was NBC’s interaction with Hannibal viewers through the Tumblr “NBCHannibal.” Hannibal is a new show that starting airing April 2013. Even though it was barely picked up for a second season, it has an almost rabid fan base. This is, in part, due to NBC’s contributions through very popular websites, like Tumblr and Twitter, to stay in touch with the fans. The way that NBC posts about the show is very different from other examples of this that I’ve seen in the past. It’s as if one of the fans is posting, which I think really helps unite the viewers of the show and bolster its popularity.
Another thing I’ve seen frequently on current TV is programming textuality. Caldwell relates this to the “sweeps” periods, during which Nielsen processes paper diaries sent to television viewers’ homes. Because these periods of time are important for analyzing a show’s popularity, this is when shows often “pull out all the stops” and do something extreme with the plot, worthy of viewers’ attention. I saw this recently during the November sweeps for the show Person of Interest, where a very dramatic three-episode arc was built up and advertised over and over in commercials, and ended in major changes for the show. These are often times where characters are killed off.
Ritual textuality, as described by Caldwell, has existed in television production for years and years, particular the process of “writing by committee,” which Caldwell so badly laments. Television today is, indeed, written by a set of writers, with each working on different episodes. Is this any surprise, though? It is not uncommon for networks to run more than twenty episodes. Dividing the work up ensures that each episode’s script can be as highly polished as possible when it comes time for shooting. It is just simply unreasonable to assume that one person can pump out sixty, quality pages a week. That is not to say it is completely impossible, Aaron Sorkin is listed with a writing credit on nearly every episode of the show up until the end of its fourth season, after which Sorkin left the production.
Caldwell, and many scholars like him, seem very determined to find an author, a specific individual to praise or condemn for a particular piece when it becomes more and more clear that television and, indeed, film are very, very rarely the expression of a singular entity. A single producer, or show runner, may be incharge of the day to day operations of a program, but the myriad of writers, directors, and supporting actors that run through a show over the course of its run undoubtedly leave their own, individual traces on the production. To give one man or woman the credit for the works of dozens is a great disservice.
Regardless, conglomerate textuality, unlike ritual textuality is a truly new phenomenon thanks to the advent of the technology it the process hinges on. Digital advertisement, as seen with the various banner ads for any number of shows, whether distributed on a traditional broadcast network, a cable network, or an online streaming service, and various “alternate reality games” that are used to market media products, including television content, are not possible without the massive web of data that is the internet.
The television that is consumed today applies many of John Caldwell’s elements of convergence television, however, what sticks out most to me would have to be programming textuality and ritual textuality. Ritual textuality involves the social performance of show making that starts with the authors, which Caldwell notes as being the “industrial actors” (p. 57). The pitch is referred to as performance art where “writers must hook a producer/buyer/executive’s attention in a matter of second with the promise of something original” (p. 58). Most television shows that are pitched today follow the “just-like-but-very-different” approach, with examples like Pee-Wee’s Playhouse being pitched as “Mister Rogers on acid” (p. 58). Moreover, there seems to be a “committee-mode in TV that attributes the plot line, characters and overall narrative to a team of multiple writers, which can often times “‘punch-up' the scenes” (p. 59). Applying this concept of ritual textuality to the television that I consume today, I would have to say that I find most of these concepts working in favor of the shows that I find myself keeping up with each week. For example, the show Homeland, could be considered a same-but-different play off of the hit West Wing; both shows involve a close look into government relations, however with obvious differences. Programming textuality is considered includes the practices of stunting and sweeps weeks. Sweeps weeks (November, February and May) are selected weeks in which "networks establish advertising rates for the months that follow based on Nielsen ratings calculated during the sweeps” (p. 61). Stunts, “special episodes of series are frequently aired to attract a higher-than-represntative audience and so ‘spike’ ratings” during sweeps weeks (p. 61). The most widely used stunt that I have recognized in the television that I watch today is definitely the cross-genre guest-star stunt in which important, famous and/or lead characters in one show, will appear in another popular show, of which they are not in the regular cast. While no particular show comes to mind, every time I see advertisements for this cross-genre guest-star stunt I find it to be very exciting and kind of “cool” in a way. I like how it brings different shows together, and to me it makes the programs seem that much more real in a way because you see fictional characters that before, you did not think "knew about each other," but now appeared on the same screen. I think that this kind of stunt is very beneficial for the television that I consume today because it makes the programs that much more interesting, especially in a day and age where stimulation is crucial to entertainment.
ReplyDeleteAlex! I liked that you chose to focus on Caldwell’s element of programming textuality, specifically the use of “stunts,” such as the cross-genre guest-star stunt. The television I consume today most definitely uses this aspect of convergence TV in order to attract a higher than usual audience and to boost ratings as well. I think Law & Order: SVU would be a great example of this; the show keeps the same central cast, however, each episode features different actors as the victim and district attorneys, along with other minor roles within the show’s narrative. Although the episodes do not always feature a celebrity guest-star, they tend to use them quite frequently. As noted by the Huntington Post, as of July 2013, Law & Order: SVU has featured a total of 219 celebrity guest-stars, including teen pop stars and Oscar winners. Therefore, it is interesting to note that these celebrities are generally not featured on TV; a majority of the guest-stars are celebrities from another kind of media sector such as film/movies or even music artists. Sometimes specific episodes will feature multiple celebrities, such as the time Carol Burnett and Matthew Lillard starred in the same show. Additionally, Law & Order episodes have been inspired by celebrity stories; that being said, they do not have the actual celebrities star in the show. The most common example of this would be when one of the fairly recent episodes was based on Chris Brown physically abusing Rihanna. I think this would also be something to consider when thinking about Caldwell’s elements and how they apply to the TV we watch today!
DeleteWell, just recently, History, A&E, and Lifetime all contributed to broadcast Bonnie and Clyde. Frist of all, this is a big stunt to try and draw audiences to these three networks. Commercials constantly define this event as “EPIC.” But what is “EPIC” about this program? Nothing I would say. It’s not like there hasn’t been programs like Bonnie and Clyde before. The one thing that makes this “EPIC” is the fact that it’s going to be broadcast over three networks. Keep in mind that all three networks are owned by A+E Networks.
ReplyDeleteEither way, what’s spectacular is the amount of work they put into making the program seem spectacular, “EPIC.” Apart from its two-night television life, there is more to be found online. This program is promoted on each of the networks websites. They offer behind-the-scene content from program with the creators and actors commentary. They offer information about the cast playing the characters. In A&E’s site, they even have Facebook and Twitter feeds that show what people said about the program. This “EPIC” coming together of networks doesn’t just stop on the television screen, but it lives on in each of their websites. The program maybe more or less good, but the effort put into making us believe it’s going to be “EPIC” is epic.
I think each of Caldwell’s five points about convergence television are present in TV today, but I immediately thought of examples for conglomerate textuality and programming texuality. Conglomerate textuality is the converging of TV shows with the Internet via websites about the show, for the viewers. Caldwell writes that, "The most effective Web sites for TV succeed by keeping viewer-users engaged long after a series episode has aired, and this requires greatly expanding the notion of what a TV text is" (51). The example that sprang to mind was NBC’s interaction with Hannibal viewers through the Tumblr “NBCHannibal.” Hannibal is a new show that starting airing April 2013. Even though it was barely picked up for a second season, it has an almost rabid fan base. This is, in part, due to NBC’s contributions through very popular websites, like Tumblr and Twitter, to stay in touch with the fans. The way that NBC posts about the show is very different from other examples of this that I’ve seen in the past. It’s as if one of the fans is posting, which I think really helps unite the viewers of the show and bolster its popularity.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing I’ve seen frequently on current TV is programming textuality. Caldwell relates this to the “sweeps” periods, during which Nielsen processes paper diaries sent to television viewers’ homes. Because these periods of time are important for analyzing a show’s popularity, this is when shows often “pull out all the stops” and do something extreme with the plot, worthy of viewers’ attention. I saw this recently during the November sweeps for the show Person of Interest, where a very dramatic three-episode arc was built up and advertised over and over in commercials, and ended in major changes for the show. These are often times where characters are killed off.
Ritual textuality, as described by Caldwell, has existed in television production for years and years, particular the process of “writing by committee,” which Caldwell so badly laments. Television today is, indeed, written by a set of writers, with each working on different episodes. Is this any surprise, though? It is not uncommon for networks to run more than twenty episodes. Dividing the work up ensures that each episode’s script can be as highly polished as possible when it comes time for shooting. It is just simply unreasonable to assume that one person can pump out sixty, quality pages a week. That is not to say it is completely impossible, Aaron Sorkin is listed with a writing credit on nearly every episode of the show up until the end of its fourth season, after which Sorkin left the production.
ReplyDeleteCaldwell, and many scholars like him, seem very determined to find an author, a specific individual to praise or condemn for a particular piece when it becomes more and more clear that television and, indeed, film are very, very rarely the expression of a singular entity. A single producer, or show runner, may be incharge of the day to day operations of a program, but the myriad of writers, directors, and supporting actors that run through a show over the course of its run undoubtedly leave their own, individual traces on the production. To give one man or woman the credit for the works of dozens is a great disservice.
Regardless, conglomerate textuality, unlike ritual textuality is a truly new phenomenon thanks to the advent of the technology it the process hinges on. Digital advertisement, as seen with the various banner ads for any number of shows, whether distributed on a traditional broadcast network, a cable network, or an online streaming service, and various “alternate reality games” that are used to market media products, including television content, are not possible without the massive web of data that is the internet.