TV

Analyse how the transformation of the United States during the 1970s affected the world of the Mary Tyler Moore Show. These changes can be cultural, such as Mary discovering that her male predecessor in her producer job made more money than she did, Lou's divorce from his wife, and Lou's one-night stand with Sue Ann. But these changes can also be economic, such as Phyllis making cutbacks in the household, and gaining employment (in addition to her housewife duties) due to inflation. These angles are examples of what can be used in an article.

In 2003, Joss Whedon's Firefly was cancelled by Fox. The show was witty, original and would retroactively become beloved. The show became a cultural signpost for the idea that fans could "save" a show and the browncoat movement was born, eventually pushing an excellent and satisfying move into production. Jump to 2006 and fans of the cancelled show "Jericho" sent 9 tons of peanuts to CBS offices in protest to the show's looming cancellation. (It made sense in context, honest.) Later, Netflix briefly revives Arrested Development. Later still, Yahoo "saved" Community so it could get its shot at "six seasons and a movie". As the internet improves fans' ability to communicate directly with the creators and distributors, and as those fans get more savvy with their methods, the power of deciding "what's on" is more and more in the hands of the viewer.

But is this always a good thing?

Would Firefly be as beloved if it had continued another 3 seasons? Does Community still work without Donald Glover? As televisions fans gain more power and direct control over their favourite shows, are we not also becoming more responsible for the tough decisions? And ultimately, who has control over when a series ends? The fans who love it, embrace it and for whom it was ultimately for? Or the creators whose blood, sweat and tears are the creative juice that made it so good in the first place?

Steven Moffat, the writer for Doctor Who since 2010, has said horrible things about the female fan base of this show, and Sherlock, which he co-created, as well as detestable things about women in general. Highlights might include calling women "needy," calling actress Karen Gillan (Amy Pond) "wee and dumpy" and claiming that women only enjoy Sherlock because they are attracted to Benedict Cumberbatch. This is enough to enrage anyone, but does it affect the quality of his Doctor Who episodes when he dismisses the majority of his own fan base as boy-crazy, "needy" idiots.

There has always been a sort of dismissal for anything in pop culture which attracts female viewership, (especially young female viewership), implying that girls don't know the difference between good and bad entertainment. As feminist scholar Stacy Wolf says, "Historicizing the devaluation of girls' tastes shows how categories of cultural worth are highly gendered." (Changed for Good, 222) Does this apply to Doctor Who since Moffat took over? This study would compare the quality of female characters on Doctor Who before and after Moffat and their overall impact on the quality of events.

On demand streaming services are fast becoming popular platforms for watching films and TV. They have also changed *how* we watch, in particular how we watch TV series.

Often referred to as binge-watching, people are able to watch an entire season or series in one session if they so choose. This is great in some ways (for example shows like Arrested Development and Master of None are created with a greater flow from one episode to the next, allowing for more time spent on creativity and less time on recaps), yet perhaps not so good in others.

Viewers lose that excited expectation of seeing their favourite show over a number of weeks, TV becomes less of a social event between friends and colleagues watching the same show at the same time and more of a solitary activity, and as binge-watching suggests it can be hard to know when to stop, and too much TV watching is associated with health problems.

An article could take a nostalgic look back to pre-streaming television, overall weighing up the pros and cons between both, without writing off non-streaming TV due to the more obvious convenience benefits of streaming. In short, as with anything else delayed gratification can be good for us!

A case study style piece on relationships in popular sitcoms with the aim of discussing progression (or lack of) in the sitcom genre, for example – Sam and Diane in Cheers, Ross and Rachel in Friends, Niles and Daphne in Frasier, Ted and Robin / Barney and Robin / Lily and Marshall in How I Met Your Mother, Jim and Pam in The Office, Penny and Leonard (and other relationships) in The Big Bang Theory, Andy and April in Parks and Recreation, the range of relationships in Modern Family (particularly Cam and Mitchell and how the show plays with gender roles in a gay coupling). Do these shows challenge gender norms or not, and to what extent is this only due to shows moving with the times? Are some modern shows handling relationship dynamics better than others?

Explore the gender dynamics in the Starz original series Spartacus. Possible themes to analyze:

-"Equal opportunity" nudity: While there is a good deal of female nudity in Spartacus, there's also a fair amount of male nudity. How are bodies used visually? Is there a difference depending on gender, or is it truly equal? The concept of the male gaze could be discussed here, as well as shows criticized for an imbalance skewed toward far more female nudity than male.

-Power Dynamics, Agency, and Sexual Violence: In the show, there are stark power issues between the Roman elite and the enslaved (and later freed) individuals. Power is something that permeates this entire topic, even above when considering how the show treats nudity. Spartacus also contains sexual violence, and attention is given to female rape survivors such as Aurelia and Naevia, but it is also worth mentioning that, in the case of enslaved men such as Spartacus, Crixus, and Varro, they are often shown engaging in intercourse with Roman upperclass women (Lucretia and Ilithyia) or, in Varro's case, enslaved women for the benefit of entertaining the Romans.

In these circumstances, the enslaved men are stripped of their agency and have no means to refuse these interactions. Because their consent is never taken into account, these acts are rape. Analyzing the difference between how male and female rape survivors are treated, as well as how their abusers and the abuse is framed (such as male-on-female assault in contrast to female-on-male), could be beneficial.

-Marriages and expectations: Spartacus also deals with societal gender expectations. As an example, Batiatus and Lucretia are happily married despite troubles conceiving (an issue Lucretia internalizes as her fault, possibly due to not being younger) and infidelity. Lucretia specifically calls out the double standard of women being shamed for their needs and adultery much more than men. Also, because she does conceive with a man who is not her husband, the blame toward her inability to get pregnant is misplaced, but still something that puts far more pressure on her than Batiatus.

-Tropes such as the warrior woman (most of the freed women) and the Lost Lenore (Sura's death, which motivates Spartacus to rebel)

Discuss the polyamorous marriage depicted between the two lead characters, Frank and Claire Underwood, in Netflix's House of Cards. Is the relationship depicted accurate or contrived? What does this depiction do for the characters on the show? How does the depiction of polyamory on television change society's perception of these relationships?

Analyze the development of certain characters throughout the series. For example, in the earliest seasons, Kenny is known for dying in most episodes. Later, his character is allowed to develop, since he doesn't die quite as frequently. Also, his identity as Mysterion and more active participation in recent episodes gives his character a bit more depth. Similarly, Wendy becomes more than just the girl Stan has a crush on and later dates. As the series progressed, she is portrayed as intelligent and thoughtful. Cartman can also be discussed, either as an example of a character whose characterization has changed (i.e. more outrageous) or as a character that remains more or less the same. Discuss the ramifications of such character development in relation to the show's themes and direction.