During final stages of logging the time use diary I moved from my family home to an apartment in the city, I thought this was a great opportunity to see how my viewing habits might change, so in this reflection I plan on looking at various differences I found during my change of scenery.

as we learnt in the second lecture of the semester scheduling is one way audiences behaviour is regularised. ‘The means by which a days broadcasting is arranged so that particular programs coincide with particular supposed events in the life of the family’ – (Ellis 1982). In my early weeks of the Time-Use diary it is easy to see that there is a correlation between watching TV and eating dinner. On a regular basis, if I was home for dinner I was in front of the television with my Mum and Dad. When I moved however, as I was responsible for cooking my own food I began eating dinner a lot later, where once it was around 6:30 – 7:00 it was now 8:00. Another variable I’d like to throw into the mix is the fact that I’m currently watching all of my TV on Netflix, the program that allows you to watch programs whenever you want. So where the Broadcst networks were once able to choose when programs where on, thus in my case choosing when dinner was, I now have the power to choose when I watch.

Another interesting aspect about my habits when I moved were the types of shows that I watched before and after my move. When I was at home I noted that whenever we’d refer to a TV show it was classified as someone’s TV show; for example, whenever we mentioned Doctor Who it was said to be “Mum’s Show”, Later when we were watching Jag it was noted as “Dad’s Show” in regular conversation. When I moved I no longer had to watch anyone else show but “my show”. As it turns out I love a good comedy, however I’m now not reaching the range of different shows that I was once watching, I seem to be more honed in on a single series as well, not watching anything else until I finished the series that I was watching. Jason Mitten (2001) explains in his article that “Genre should be situated within larger systems, cultural hierarchies and power relations”, which is an interesting concept when I have changed the cultural hierarchy from my parents house to mine. Perhaps this also has something to do with the Flow that Netflix creates (as mentioned in the third lecture), one episodes starts playing right after the other and when you open Netflix it always asks you if you’d like to pick up where you left off.

I think it worth expanding on my choice of Netflix over other web services. As Mentioned in Lecture 9 on HBO certain brands are connected to “quality TV”. As Deborah L. Jaramillo (2013) explores AMC and “calls into question the power of the brand and its connection to quality TV” the power of “Netflix” as a brand is a lot stronger than Presto or Stan (I’ve never heard of “Presto and Chill” or “Stan and Chill”). Ultimately it was this Brand Power and promise of Netflix Exclusive shows such as Daredevil that brought me to Netflix.

As Ben Goldsmith states, Netflix could (and has) changed where and when and how viewers look for and watch content. I’m a perfect example of this, during my change over from watching Free-to-air with my parents to watching Netflix, it has changed my common viewing place, from the lounge room to my bedroom, it has changed when I watch things and how much I watch things (I tend to binge watch a lot now).

Ultimately the Time Use Diary has helped me explore the change in my viewing habits not only from changing location and cultures (from parents household to living alone), but the difference in changing the form platform I watch things on, which is not necessarily a good thing but interesting none-the-less.

References:

Ellis, J 1982, ‘Cinema, Television, video’, Visible fiction, London, RKP (1982).

Mitten, J 2001, ‘A Cultural Approach to Television Genre Theory’, Cinema Journal, vol. 40, pp. 3-24

Jaramillo, D.L. 2013, ‘AMC: Stumbling towards a New Television Canon’, Television and New Media, vol. 14, pp. 167-183

Goldsmith, B 2015, ‘What do Netflix, Stan and Presto mean for Australian TV?’, The conversation, viewed 28th October 2015, <https://theconversation.com/what-do-netflix-stan-and-presto-mean-for-australian-tv-39244>

During week 12’s lecture the concept of the Transnational format was explored through The Office and its move from Britain to America. I’d like to explore how the transnational format works and doesn’t by comparing the success of The Office to the failure of Kath & Kim in the US.

The difference between American and British Humour is an article in which Ricky Gervais, the creator of the original series The office, talks about the changes that had to be made in the American version of The office. It was understood that American and British humour were different and what would seem funny to the British seemed offensive to America. One of the main changes that Gervais mentions is the change in Michael Scott, the main character, who used to be teasing and ironic sarcasm his main weapon, had to turn into a nice guy, with a “rosier outlook to life”. So even though it is the same show with the same title and the same characters, changes had to be made to reach the national culture of its viewers. It is fair to say that The Office US was a huge success, starting in 2005 the show ran for 9 seasons, potentially proving that changing a show to suit a different national audience is possible (Time 2011).

There is however, plenty of examples where the format failed. Kath & Kim was written, produced and cast in Australia. The show was extremely successful in Australia running for 4 seasons including two movies. The television show is set in a fictional town in the Melbourne outer-suburbs and draws humour from the “bogan” caricature of a mother and daughter relationship. “The humour is derived from local references, garish costuming and cringe-worthy mispronunciations to create a light-hearted parody in representation of the Australian lower middle-class” (Webb 2013). Ultimately this show is a success because it draws on the ability of its Australian audience to laugh at themselves.

In 2008 Kath and Kim was sent overseas into America, there was big hype about it in Australia, a sense of national pride that we were now influencing America. Unfortunately the hype didn’t last long and the show was cancelled after only 2 episodes aired, due to low ratings. Why did this happen? The shows format was translated into an American equivalent, instead of the Australian “Bogan”, they were America “White Trash”, the story followed the day to day lives of a mother and daughter relationship and the actors had an American accent! There is no denying that it was American. So, without including outlying factors, the only thing to blame is the American audience didn’t like the format, which was originally Australian. Where the Australian culture was happy to laugh at themselves and understood the joke, American culture is not as prone to self humiliation as a form of humour (Webb 2013).

It is interesting to note, however, that Australians have been watching American comedies for years, Friends, Seinfeld, How I Met your Mother and the Big bang theory have all stayed on our screens for multiple seasons, which raises the question if you truely have a transnational format, do you need to change anything, or can you send it over pre-packaged? There is definitely other factors that should be considered like locations within the story, money, star power and international acclaim, however if we’re just taking the show for face value, sometimes the format of a show just doesn’t fit with the culture of a certain audience.

Ultimately Kath & Kim failed in America because it didn’t reach its local audience like it had in Australia. This is due to the fact that the two different cultures possessed different attributes in humour, the irony and sarcasm lost in the US audience which is the entire format of the show.

References

Webb, M 2013, Television, ‘Humour and Transnational Audiences’, weblog post, 2 December, The Artifice, viewed 26 October 2015, <http://the-artifice.com/television-humour-and-transnational-audiences/>

Time 2011, ‘The difference between British and American Humour’, Time inc., viewed 26 October 2015, <http://time.com/3720218/difference-between-american-british-humour/>

 

*Spoiler Alert*

In this Post I will identify the key ideas of Transmedia, using the Marvel cinematic universe and their spin off television shows such as Agents of Shield, Agent Carter and the newly released Daredevil.

In its beginning Marvel made comic books, creating hundreds of characters being printed out to the page; today, Marvel not only continues to make comic books but has also translated their characters to other mediums such as movies and, even more recently, television shows. To make this Case study more specific I will only talk about one section known as the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). The concept for this began with movies, movies that are apart of a broader universe that tie into each others story lines, movies like Iron-man, Thor and Captain America. After such a great success Marvel studios took a turn to television. The problem they originally faced with the movies was that not every character was big enough to have their own movie, even though in the past these characters may have had their own comic book. By creating a television series the studio could still get the story out to the community of loyal MCU fans, but in a much cheaper way.

The specific thing to understand is that the Television shows are still apart of the MCU and is closely aligned with the events within it. For example, after The Avengers was released in cinemas the Television show Agents of Shield was directly linked to finding Alien content that had been left on earth from what occurred in the Avengers movie. As the series went on and more movies were released other correlations happened. When Thor the Dark Wold was released and cities were destroyed, the same cities were depicted in Agents of Shield. When Captain America the Winter Soldier was released and revealed that Shield was actually led by the Nazi devision Hydra, the Television show was once again directly effected.

Most recently Marvel Studios has turned to the online streaming service Netflix to release there most recent addition to the MCU, Daredevil. This show was released in the classic Netflix way, a series at a time.

This is a great example of Transmedia. Media that has been translated to fit different mediums. It would seem that companies have found out that this is a good money spinner as well, knowing that in order for the fans to keep up to date they must watch an increasing amount of media on different media platforms.

Television as we know it now has changed from beyond the tube, it is now seen on the internet and streaming devices and has a closer connection to cinema blockbusters and Marvel are using this cultural technology to broaden their horizons an encompass a bigger community following their MCU. Marvel isn’t the only one doing this either, you need only to look at their direct competitors DC comics to find a similar idea. DC has released plans to create the Justice League. The heroes with a bigger cult following like Batman and Superman have had their own movies, but the smaller heroes have opted for television shows like Arrow and The Flash, once again, all apart of the same universe.

All in all, transmedia media looks like the new thing to watch out for.

In this post I will be analysing Last Week Tonight with John Oliver and how it’s content can be used as a cultural technology and create an encompassing community that goes beyond the borders of countries.

As an audience that is used to the normal codes and conventions of a news program I am able to understand the more intricate codes and conventions of  its satire. To satirise something, other then to poke fun at it, is to critique it, so that the right audience member might, in turn, understand the critique and become more knowledgable and questioning of a particular subject. Broadly speaking, culture is views and stances that the majority of people take within a group. By having such a democratic way of doing things, where people can voice opinions and views can change over time, culture is always evolving. By using the mass media of Television satirical shows like Last Week Tonight is able to bring forward perspectives and views that other shows can’t, they are able to push the envelope. In essence they are using the Technology of television in order to cultivate a positive culture.

Although the argument can be made that they’re just making jokes and poking fun, a lot of the shows content is actually about serious and concerning developments. One such topic is the appalling state of Sex Education in American schools. In this report punch lines are reached but some shocking numbers and facts are laid down as well. One of the stories that John Oliver did on the Daily show that granted him such recognition was a 3 part series on gun laws in America, once again a serious topic that evoked a wide spread discussion on the subject. By doing this the show is able to cross the line that many other serious news shows wouldn’t tend to cross. By making these revelations so entertaining also helps the information reach the masses.

In terms of a community beyond borders: the content is very important. Even though it is a show set in America and mainly for Americans there are many segments that reach out to different parts of the world which invite other people and other cultures to initiate into its community. The very first time I had heard of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver was when he did a special segment on Tony Abbott, the Australian Prime minister. Because this shows content extended out to my culture I then reached back to its culture, watching old episodes and other segments that interested me, keeping up with his new episodes as well. Its content invites people from other countries and other cultures to participate in the ongoing critique they have of society which, in turn, is what creates a better culture and unified world community. Of course this was only possible thanks to the internet. As technologies change, cultures change and the means in communication and discourse, such as television changes.