fastidium

Its been a busy time around here as visiting grandparents and other family activities have taken precedence over blogging. But I’m back to regular writing now and have several essay style pieces in the works.

The DVR: The Good and the Bad. I think we are in a somewhat golden age of television drama. There are so many good shows right now but its hard to see it continuing. Echoing this concern, Maureen Ryan at the Chicago Tribune recently wrote about how shows like Damages are in trouble of not getting made because of the growing use of DVRs. Its no secret that network television hasn’t figured out a way to generate advertising revenue from non-live formats like DVR and DVD. And its been a worry for many that quality television will take a hit as advertisers won’t pay to have their commercials skipped by large segments of viewers.

Ryan’s argument is that Damages, and shows like it, don’t underestimate the intelligence of their audience. Since they require us to remember details about characters and how timelines switch back and forth between what happened earlier and in the present, the use of DVRs (in about 20% of American homes now) enhance the ability to watch complicated shows like this. For Damages, the numbers go from 2.2 million viewers to 5.5 million when you factor in non-live viewing (DVRs and iTunes downloads). That means that more than half of all viewers are probably not seeing the commercials.

Ryan’s fear is that, as networks begin to shy away from complicated, detailed television, so will their cable channel cousins. Let’s hope that they figure out some new and innovative way for these kinds of shows that will satisfy advertisers. How about more prominent product placement? Even though the products are outdated and nostalgic, it works for Mad Men. How about something similar to the way ESPN puts little ads in the corners of televised sports?

Ethics in Reality Television. The Bryant Park Project, on NPR, did a short segment on the ethics of reality TV. Many people believe that being behind the camera means that you are a innocent bystander. But what happens when the show is called Intervention and the alcoholic being intervened upon gets into a car drunk? The producers of the show justify their non-action by saying “the woman would have done it whether we were there or not”. Bruce Weinstein explains that when you show up with a camera, you become part of the drama and you have a responsibility to intervene.

Forthcoming. I have two upcoming posts, in addition to other regular posts, that will be a bit essay-like. They are both in the works and I’m having a great time researching them. The first essay is my first foray into the use of the term narrative in cultural criticism. A recent post by Rob Horning at Marginal Utility noted that recessions and other financial downfalls have much to do with “narratives” within a culture. I’ll have my take on that idea soon.

Secondly, I’m writing about how the second season of Heroes is stacking up. Its getting to be a long piece but I’ll have it up soon. Many people have been disappointed with the new characters and how coincidence is becoming a recurring theme. Just remember, these were things that happened at the beginning of season one as well. I think the show is moving along quite well and I think the best addition so far is Kristin Bell.

I’ll sign off with a suggestion. Search the net for Quentin Tarantino’s explanation of Top Gun. Its great. LOL great. The Youtube version has been removed but I’ve seen it up other places.