I've noticed lately that, in my opinion, sitcoms are declining in quality, and networks appear to be abandoning them and going for different genres. I think shows like The Walking Dead, Breaking Bad, and The Wire have introduced a precedent for cinematic masterpiece that TV shows haven't had to meet in the past. Will this shift kill the sitcom, or other genres of shows for that matter?
I think it has to do with the changes to the medium. Because audiences can stream whatever they want on the internet, television networks no longer have to fill airtime with superficial humor and can delve into more complex projects. Also, the internet brought about a new wave of competition. The way sitcoms are being made is also changing. Laugh-track, three-camera shows (I Love Lucy, The Big Bang Theory) are being replaced with updated styles, like The Office, or Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. Maybe they aren't dying, just transitioning? – joshuahall9 years ago
I have been thinking about this myself lately. I can re-watch Will and Grace and Friends repeatedly, but barely make it through one episode of these new "sitcoms." I have been speculating whether there is an association between the need to be politically correct and not offend people and the reduction in humorous shows. Nowadays it's all sexual innuendoes and crude jokes, no more intelligent jokes. – Catherine Conte9 years ago
In 2013, NBC got America's attention by producing The Sound of Music Live! Ratings went through the roof! Next was Peter Pan, and then The Wiz. Now Fox has done Grease Live with an audience and different locations. Who did it better? NBC or Fox? Explore the history of live televised musical theatre performances. Explore techniques, successes, and failures to determine who wears the live musical crown.
Netflix stands by its method of releasing an entire season of a show at once; House of Cards, Orange is the New Black, and Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt are all successful shows that have used this method. How will this change the television series model? Will cable television shows lag behind due to the extra space between each episode's release? Without the concept of screen time on a network, will we see more series produced exclusively for the web, where we have unlimited space and time for television shows? How will this change the structure of each show? Will dramas continue to end each episode with suspense to ensure the viewer's return, or save the big twists for the end of the season? And, as an afterthought, will cable shows garner more fans when they are released online for streaming, versus their original premiere on a network?
Netflix is taking advantage of its model and that's that people watch Netflix to binge. If they were to release an ep once a week, it might disinterest viewers and look for another completed show to watch (one that has multiple seasons). Broadcasters release an episode per week to get viewers to come back, and leave cliffhangers to tease them. It's simply understanding your structure and using it to your advantage. – YsabelGo9 years ago
Live television will always have its place, for the background noise or the effect of experiencing something with thousands of people at one. However, I do believe the quality will go down. We'll see less drama that relies on you watching every week and more comedy. People come to live television to watch for a bit and then walk away. Why watch a drama on television in the coming years when you can watch the whole story from beginning to end by losing a day? Netflix will change television styles to a mixture of suspense at each episode's end and saving the big twists. They've proved that both are excellent models for television. It just depends on what kind of show you're presenting. – casswaslike9 years ago
Scripted television shows have been struggling of late, most especially the sitcom. It used to be that shows lasted for six seasons or more (M*A*S*H with 11 seasons, Friends with 10, Seinfeld with 9, Will and Grace with 8 etc. etc.). These shows were clever and all of which, even a series about nothing (Seinfeld), have had re-runs playing since they went off the air. Now shows follow the same trite scripts: eventually all focusing more on relationships and/or unrealistic story lines. So what could be the solution? Reality shows? No. Even reality shows are not that realistic, having been dramatized by producers to get increased ratings.
So what can be done? It is important that viewers, especially the young and impressionable, see shows that can be simultaneously entertaining and educational. Television is so popular that it has the power to influence one's perception of the events of their own life so it is important that at least some of the shows send positive messages and are relatable.
Whoever covers this topic should define "reality." Munjeera – Munjeera9 years ago
I don't think it is clear enough what this topic is. You speak about reality, but then mention sitcoms which aren't necessarily known for their realism. I'm not sure what the focus of this topic is: shows becoming less realistic and more sensationalist, the opportunity for change in television. These are interesting concepts, but I think you need to create a very clear contention, which is not made clear above. – Matthew Sims9 years ago
Analyse the portrayal of freak shows in popular culture. The fascination with the deformed and/or exotic body has been a source of entertainment since the mid-16th century. Although freak shows in circuses have largely died out, the interest in these kinds of shows has persisted in the form of film, books, and movies. What do TV shows such as American Horror Story: Freak Show and films like Freaks say about human fears, anxieties, and culture?
This topic could reach a lot of people, just look at the "You won't believe .. etc." articles that trend all over the internet and on people's facebook. They're very popular and a lot of them involve something gross happening to someone, it's a modern adaptation of the freak show only much more private and easy to access. – Slaidey9 years ago
There is already an article pending which talks about this. – Christen Mandracchia9 years ago
So, will this be about freak shows as such or their portrayal in media. It feels like two completely different things. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Do you think the Netflix series Daredevil handled the issue of ableism well? Do you think it was covered too much, too little, or just right? Do you think the show helps diversify the stories we have about disabled people, or do you think it played into old stereotypes and tropes?
Through his heightened senses, he's able to perceive the world in ways that mitigate the disabling effect of his blindness. But he is still blind. When he's fighting, it's easy to forget that he can't see, because this show (as opposed to the 2003 Ben Affleck vehicle) rarely tries to depict how the world "appears" to Murdock. Maybe talk about other representations of blindness in movies or television shows, and compare it to Daredevil. Also, looking at the Daredevil movie staring Ben Affleck and Netflix's Daredevil, could also give a different perspective. – ADenkyirah9 years ago
I love this topic. I just started watching this show, and I would have said that they handle it very well. I learned some things about blind culture (like braille laptops... who knew?). That could be an interesting thing to include in the article, actually (how do those sort of references contribute to the audience's view of blindness?). I also appreciated the part in the first episode where he tells Karen that he does actually miss his sight; I liked that in spite of the fact that he's a badass superhero, he doesn't pretend that it's a non-issue. However, while we know that about him, we also know that he goes on with his life. He doesn't pity himself. It's just a part of him, like anything else. It's there, but it's not treated as this pitiable thing. If anything, I would say the show is the opposite of ableist. Also, I think the way new people interact with Matt is probably a good representation of how people might react to meeting a blind person. (Meeting Karen is a good example) At the same time, I wonder if he might face more discrimination than they show within the series. They don't ignore blind issues, I don't think, but I do think there is the potential for more. Then again, his blindness isn't the focus of the series; his superhero activities are. And would focusing more on his blindness just lead to an unrealistic demonstration of self-pity? I'm torn. So, it's a complicated topic. I guess it depends on what angle you want to take! – Laura Jones8 years ago
Starting with the new Netflix show Sense8, which the creators have discussed as a 'twelve hour movie,' discuss how Netflix's schedule of releasing all new episodes at once has changed the way we view pacing/narrative challenges in TV shows.
I'd also like to point out that they've done studies that show that breaks commercial or otherwise help us to digest what we are watching. Binge watching actually makes it so that we remember less of what we see. So perhaps we end up having to watch our favorites over and over again just for it to stick? – Tatijana9 years ago
Yes, and producers who air their shows on platforms like Netflix or Hulu (or Amazon) need to take that into account. Cliffhangers, for example, definitely don't have the same effect. – jmato9 years ago
Netflix has locked on to the needs of consumer culture. "We want more and we want it now." I'm sure there are statistics out there that show how longer shows that air on tv only once a week lose viewers consistently because either people can't be bothered to wait or they finally miss one episode and go "well, whatever, I'm out of date now and I don't really care to take the effort to catch up." Bingeing is part of the instant gratification our society has become accustomed to. – Slaidey9 years ago
I think we also miss out on the interactional aspect that week-to-week shows tend to have too. In an interview, Constance Zimmer (who has appeared on the Netflix show House of Cards) said that, while the ability to binge definitely has its advantages for fans, a disadvantage is that we miss the "water cooler conversations" that happen when shows are released over time. It's harder to converse with others about what we are viewing because we're afraid of spoiling something for them. There's so much pressure to watch it all as quickly as possible, there's no time to soak it all in or discuss what we're watching. Back before the binge culture, people would often chat about their reactions on what they had both watched the night before, talk about their predications on what would happen next, etc. – elphabaanne9 years ago
I have to second what elphabaanne stated. I live tweet shows like "Arrow", "Agents of Shield", and " The Walking Dead". However, when Jessica Jones was released Friday I couldn't live tweet the show; everyone was on different episodes, most having finished the entirety of JJ already. While I like the immediacy of Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu to a lesser extent I feel they create distance between audience members. Being able to discuss what I love about a show is important to me, it is through discussion I am able to realize new aspects about something which has caught my attention. I hope this has provided some assistance to you. Note: I would focus on Jessica Jones, Orange is the New Black,- Sense8 has been out for a while now.
– SincerelySeb9 years ago
With most spoilers and discussions for shows happening on places like Tumblr and Reddit, being able to binge watch a series that everyone else has already watched does have the positive effect of facilitating people to catch up on social conversations. However, I would agree that the loss of the suspense factor and the time for the brain to imagine alternate conclusions robs the fans of an aspect of the storytelling experience. – EulalieS9 years ago
No delayed gratification, that's for sure. – Jaye Freeland9 years ago
Definitely support the writing of such a topic. Perhaps discuss whether the path of Netflix's acceptance into modern consumption activity will ever mean that this release of televisual content will ever become the norm. – Matthew Sims9 years ago
There might also be the question about how the way we are encouraged to binge-watch shows, the way we do binge-watch shows, changes the way shows are written, directed and produced.
And, maybe, as this note comes about 4 years late, the evolution of those tendencies (in general and/or more particularly since this topic was submitted, 4 years ago). [I hope my (verylate) comment is still relevant and understandable, as I am neither a native English speaker nor fluent in English – yet!] – Gavroche5 years ago
People today aren't watching TV the moment it airs. In the early days of TV, people had to sit down and watch TV the moment it aired or else they would have no other chance to see it. Today, we are watching TV on Netflix and online when it is convenient for us to watch. How is this changing the way we consume TV? Is this making the TV industry weaker and will it slowly die out like past mediums (radio, newspaper, etc.)?
It is in a sense making TV weaker, because honestly, I watched about four episodes of The Flash, but when I heard it was going to be on Netflix I stopped watching it and now that it's currently on Netflix I'm honestly just going to binge watch it. I think that's how it's going downhill. A lot of consumers probably do that, unless the show is the best show you've ever seen, it's better to just wait till you watch it online. Shows like Rick and Morty, you can only watch on Adult Swim, you can barely find it online, except on the website, so it's harder to say with R&M because I watched that faithfully on screen. You can basically find every show online now, not even with a streaming service, the minute it airs and even sometimes before it's on the internet for you, so it's an interesting generation we have here. – scoleman9 years ago
The format of TV series is likely not to die out, just the way the business and marketing strategies currently run. With more and more shows being produced by Amazon and Netflix strictly for their exclusive online markets, and plenty of shows like Doctor Who, Steven Universe, Star Wars Rebels, and any number of others releasing their new episodes on Itunes a day to a few days after they first air: plenty of people, including myself, have less of a reason to watch an episodes premiere on cable television, and would rather wait to at least watch it when we want to, and be able to own it and download it at the very same time. There's a bit more power and control that way when it comes to my viewing habits. – Jonathan Leiter9 years ago
While I agree that to some degree it is making TV weaker, it's definitely expanding the variety of television shows available. However, I feel like there's a collective knowledge impact that would probably be lost in this new era where everything is available instantly and nothing is delivered. For example, everybody knew what Twin Peaks by the time it finished it's first season in the early 90s and the television show Beverly Hills 90210 was zeitgeist to the 90s decade, albeit the final season did end in 2000. I like the idea where the reign of television is questioned and as to whether or not it would fade away, but would it be possible that for it to just morph into an amalgam medium that retains its former structure but just presents itself without a cable/channel service provider? – tvguyd9 years ago
