Television_and_American_Norms

Television and American Norms Introduction. Television has been around for some time and the impact on Americans and their views of what is considered normal and acceptable has been large. This paper will break down a few different types of television programs and discuss how those programs are affecting the viewers. Studies will be used to show the past, current and possible future effects and the change in television programing over the years. There are many different types of television shows but this paper is going to concentrate on four primary types, prime time shows, game shows, reality television shows and news programs. Each of these have the potential to change the way Americans look at the world and what they consider to be normal. Prime Time Television in America Prime time programming between the advent of television and current day brings a different perspective to the history of television. In 1939, at the end of the Depression, the National Broadcasting Company (NBC) aired the Ethel Walters show. This program was a mixture of musical entertainment. Live shows, much like the Ethel Waters program, were popular during this era so it was only natural that one of the first popular programs would reflect this popularity. The Ethel Waters show contained a mixture of comedy and drama and starred an African-American female. In 1948, television had drawn enough attention that Harold Lasswell, a communication theorist, posed the question “Who says what to whom through which channels and with what effects'” (Hoyer, 2007, p. 184). Lasswell was questioning who was choosing mass media messages in every forum, not only television, but his question is definitely applicable given the rising popularity of the forum. He suggested a link between messages found in mass media and what affect it had upon the viewer. Using The Ethel Waters Show as an example, it seems as if NBC may have been trying to lift the spirits at the end of a depressed era or were they answering a call from the public for a distraction from every day hardships. Mr. Lasswell’s questions were the beginning of content analysis research. The reason for this research was to develop a scientific method to analyze information gathered regarding what types of media messages were popular, how they were viewed, and what influence these messages were having. In the 1960s, popular prime time programming consisted of Green Acres, the Ed Sullivan Show, Bewitched, Gilligan’s Island and Peyton Place (Fagan, n.d). History states the era of the 1960s was a time for change. Appropriately, television programming reflected this change. While some programs held on to values from the 1950s, many shows reflected a new emerging vision. For example, Bewitched offered a glance into an alternative lifestyle by discussing the possibility of witchcraft in mainstream America. American viewers questioned everyday life during the 1960s. Either television moguls picked up on this then instituted the same in programming, or viewers made their questioning obvious through their choices. During this time, viewers were limited to only a few channels. Programmers were careful to ensure prime time choices would be accepted among a large audience. Content analysis research regarding television viewing during the 1950s to 1960s suggested “individuals acted alone without reference to a community” when it came to making choices about the messages they chose to hear (Hoyer, 2007, pg. 185). This would indicate the viewers chose programming based solely upon individual needs. These results align with Blumler and Katz’s Uses and Gratifications Theory (Spring, 2001). The Uses and Gratifications Theory suggests that an individual uses and selects media messages based on individual needs. Critics suggest this theory is an optimistic view that underestimates the power media can have over a group of people. Supporters cite free will would combat any attempt by the media to impose messages subconsciously upon viewers. Further investigation found users commonly disregard programming, which cannot be correlated to their everyday lives (Hoyer, 2007, pg 185.). This would suggest that viewer’s chose programs to which they could relate to as any other message would simply be unpopular or disregarded. Referred to as “selective perception,” this theory suggests that viewers avoided contradiction shielding them from anything that may threaten their current values and prejudices (Hoyer, 2007, pg 185). [pic] Figure 1 What does selective perception say about prime time television choices today' Current popularity seems to defy selective perception. According to an article published by Broadcasting and Cable in early 2008, “in turbulent times that include recession, war, and political tussles, viewers seem to want an escape” (Albiniak, 2008). The most popular shows at the time of this writing include Two and a Half Men, Family Guy, Seinfeld and Everybody Loves Raymond (Albiniak, 2008). Interestingly, two of these shows are currently in syndication. Seinfeld and Everybody Loves Raymond episodes are re-run, first popular in the late 1990s. Two and a Half Men is a current sitcom portraying the life of a divorced man living with his brother. Family Guy is an adult cartoon portraying a dysfunctional family with a talking dog. These shows portray a different American culture when compared to programs of the 1960s. The continued popularity of Seinfeld and Everybody Loves Raymond seems to suggest American’s are searching for an escape from current times, which include discussions of war and recession. Seinfeld and Everybody Loves Raymond episodes pre-date September 11, 2001 and the war in Iraq. Two and Half Men contains no reference to war or current events. Family Guy may jokingly refer to current events but the main focus is the fact the show is a cartoon which further suggests American’s could be looking for an escape to more serene time in their lives when cartoons were their primary viewing choice. History reveals programs aired in early television during prime time were chosen by media companies because of anticipated popularity with the public. The Ethel Waters Show was chosen because it appealed to a large audience. The programs discussed from the 1960s were chosen for prime time for the same reason. Why would the current era of prime time television be any different' Media moguls are subject to the same society as their viewers. Therefore, “the media product seems to be a function that is influenced by the social mores and political systems within which they operate” (Hoyer, 2008). This information was derived through either meso or organizational level studies of society. Media has been given more freedom of expression. Viewers readily accept this freedom, as the world around them presents fluctuating norms and mores. Prime time television choices are reflection of these changes, not necessarily a source. Programming may reinforce these changes as stated in Bandura’s Social Learning Theory (reference-saved in favorites). But a mainstream change would involve an entire culture being exposed consistently to the same influences. Simply too many choices exist in American society for this to be possible. Reality TV. A recent fairly recent change in programming is the inclusion of reality TV shows. Reality shows like MTV's Real World show real people living their lives and interacting in front of a camera. The shows are at least supposed to be unscripted and American audiences seem to have fallen in love with this form of entertainment. [pic] Figure 2 A recent survey shows women are more likely to watch reality television shows than men and that the viewing of reality TV decreases with age (Roland, 2003). A graph was created (Figure 2) to show the average age and sex of reality show viewers. This survey showed that females between the age of 12-19 are by far the most likely to watch reality television and that on average more women watch reality TV shows then men in every age group. Because the largest audience can include children, many parents are concerned about the affect reality TV could be having. Parentstv.org revolves around helping parents protect their children from potentially harmful broadcasting. The site recently completed a study comparing reality shows to scripted television the amount offensive content in each. The study revealed reality shows contained 3.5 times more offensive content. This study was performed repeatedly showing a drastic increase each year in how much profanity and sexual references were aired per hour (Aubree, 2008). The increase in profanity, sexual content and other negative examples in reality TV can have a direct impact on the audience that watches these shows. Reality TV involves the viewer directly by allowing phone calls to influence how the show progresses; including websites with additional information or footage of the show; and enhancing the viewer’s identification with the “characters.” This study is a content analysis study and shows that based on the social learning theory the audience will be more likely to identify and use profanity or follow other negative examples shown in reality TV shows. Recently, 26 reality TV shows were put under surveillance. These shows were accused of “distorting the truth” to fool the audience about what is happening on the show. Reality TV is not actually reality, but the careful presentation of live footage to entertain an audience (Grindstaff, 2008). Increases in profanity, sexual conduct and other negative examples in reality TV are purposely orchestrated to draw audiences. Reality TV has become the lowest denominator in television, pandering to what Americans want to see while pushing the envelope of what is shocking. Since such shows are often portrayed as being examples of real life, and they need to show extremes to remain popular, they present a bad example to viewers. This could have a negative impact on future generations if the current trend continues. Game Shows and America Educational game shows, such as Jeopardy, and shows strictly for entertainment, such as the Price is Right, were popular for many years. These game shows offered a chance to watch and play along with contestants competing for prizes. Jeopardy, the number one game show for over 10 years, seemed to capture audiences. These games were meant to entertain. Viewers planned their evenings around the shows. This was a way to spend a half hour or hour of an evening with family while learning at the same time. Entertainment couldn’t last forever. Reality TV led to the reality game show. These shows topped the charts. “The Moment of Truth” is the newest in reality game shows. “The Moment of Truth is stylish, unique, and riveting. It's hard to flip the channel as some poor contestant is revealing secrets about his marriage while his wife looks on from a few feet away. The show appeals to our basic human nature, giving us permission to eavesdrop as contestants are probed by very personal questions. Overall, The Moment of Truth has the potential to become very popular. This is a show that viewers become hooked on but are too embarrassed to admit it to anyone. As long as the contestants and the questions stay fresh, this show will be around for a long time.” (Fox Broadcasting Company 2008) Reality game shows allow their audience to live through the embarrassing moments of someone else’s life. The audience becomes familiar with and eventually is able to relate to the contestant. A prime example is the game show, The Moment of Truth. One contestant, Lauren Cleary, destroyed her marriage by responding to questions about her infidelity. During the show’s season finale, she was brought back on the show for an audience follow-up. Cleary stated she had separated from her husband but the couple was trying to reconcile. The audience seemed to sympathize with Cleary’s husband while displaying disapproval for her behavior. Audiences can be affected by the outcome of such shows. Contestants, on the other hand, seem to be motivated by dollar signs. By displaying real-life drama, this type of game may attract viewers who are unhappy in their own lives. It could serve as a distraction from personal issues for some viewers. Americans seem to have a morbid curiosity drawing them to shows like Moment of Truth. A recent survey about the popularity of Moment of Truth versus Jeopardy illustrates this (figure 3). [pic] [pic] Figure 3 Games shows began in 1940, as radio shows graduated to television. “Truth or Consequences” was the first game show. If the contestant failed to answer the silly question posed, then the consequence was a silly stunt. It was all done in fun. The 1960s brought Jeopardy to TV. The shows popularity caused families to arrange their evenings around its scheduling. This educational form of entertainment brought the family together as a unit. Eventually, game shows became more provocative. The game show industry felt pressure to from the rising popularity of sitcoms. Now, games shows seem to have little educational value some shows simply offer a barrage of personal questions without regard to the consequences to the contestant. Current game shows seem to really push the envelope on what the public will deem as acceptable. The News and America Debate occurred when Katie Couric took over the evening news for CBS. The consensus was viewers would decline with a female anchor. In fact, viewers declined by 287,000 from the average of the previous year. When Brian Williams took over for Tom Brokaw on NBC, no such debate occurred. After the transition from Williams to Brokaw, 74% of viewers reported all three evening news channels were similar. NBC followed Hurricane Katrina while the other two stations did not. This, and William’s formality, enhanced NBC’s ratings with the public. John Gibson, with Fox News, is less formal and draws a higher rating due to being approachable and friendly. Viewers want to associate with the speaker of the evening news shows and whether the speaker is male or female has no bearing on whom viewers watch (Bauder, 2007). News executives at other networks are keeping a close eye on the Fox News Channel. Shortly before the Iraq War, MSNBC hired Mr. Savage, a radio talk show host and Mr. Scarborough, a former congressman trying to have better political balance in programming. This show has become the most watched news program as commentators skewer other mainstream media and anyone who questions the war effort. The new type of journalism is no longer middle of the road, objective and fair. The commentators cast aside traditional commentary and objectivity and are labeled as “the Fox Effect” by others in the news industry. After September 11, 2001, Fox turned to heavy patriotism during the fighting in Afghanistan. They labeled the Americans as “our troops” were fighting “terror goons.” As a result, ratings jumped to 1st during January 2002. After a statue of Saddam Hussein fell, Gibson said he hoped the reconstruction of Iraq would not be left up to “the dopey old U.N.” Another anchor commented he hoped this delivered a message to oppositions of liberating Iraq. CNN trailed Fox and MSNBC remained in third place. Fox news executives felt their ratings increase was simply due to the value of the reporting aired. Fox was the first stations to air live in Baghdad and from Hussein’s palace (Rutenberg, 2003). Chronic crankiness is behavior involving high stress levels. A recent study in England found that clergy are inundated with churches full of parishioners with neurotic personalities bordering on psychotic. Clergy are expected to be friendly at all times. As a result, they are now claiming to have a new disorder. Irritable clergy syndrome basis occurs from having to deal with people who are full of bad behavior and can be compared to a “toxic cocktail.” The relationship between a clergyman and his parishioners is increasingly difficult to manage. People are vulnerable to bullying and rude individuals on a daily basis. Over stimulation, too much information, images, noise, and too many things to do or get done with too little sleep or rest are contributing factors. Each person must deal with irritating or neurotic people almost on a daily basis. Working with people on a day-to-day basis that are full of bad behavior is overwhelming at times. The degeneration of civilization has people placing all types of insults on their car bumpers. The popularity of reality shows and real life has others forcing us into their beliefs by using bumper stickers. Some bumper stickers are simply, “Support Our Troops” while others are negative and insulting. Bumper stickers are forcing us to see/read the hostility of the driver and complaints stuck to vehicles (Clark, 2007). Saving the planet is a hot topic on the news and regular programming. Global warming is taking center stage and Americans want to do their part. Programmers are increasing the amount of resources and screen time for environmental issues. Rising gasoline prices and the event of Hurricane Katrina raised public awareness of environmental issues and the audience appetite is growing. The weather channel is looking at the issues and letting viewers decide for themselves. Climatologist Heidi Cullen features an hour-long program block called “Forecast Earth” and discusses climate change issues. If an auto show is featured on a news program the topic will cover hybrids instead of gas guzzling autos. Audiences want solutions for global warming and want to participate. A 13 part series will discuss the rebuilding of Greensburg, Kansas and sustainable living. Leonardo DiCaprio is on board for the story of Greensburg. DiCaprio states, “The rebuilding of Greensburg is an important story. It gives us an opportunity to create a green model for the future.” Discovery channel is launching a $50 million dollar green programming campaign in 2008. Americans feel as though they cannot rely on the politicians and must take charge themselves. Individuals want to help with the change of becoming more eco-friendly. Part of the project is a follow up to Planet Earth show. The new show is called 10 Ways to Save the Planet and will dig deep into extra material (Miller, 2007). Conclusion. The above studies and research show that television is affecting what people consider normal in America and that the programming seems to be devolving at an increasing speed. Research does not show if this is an effect of television on the general public, or a change in what the general public finds entertaining which is changing what is shown on television. Whether television is influencing audiences or whether popular programming is a reflection of current interests should be studied further. Are Americans changing television, or are current programs responsible for a change in what America views as normal. Apparently, from the research shown in this paper, television can have a directly effect the beliefs of the people that watch it. It can provide information and help persuade an audience to a point of view and it can have a dramatic impact in politics. Since so many Americans watch television on a regular basis additional studies should be done to determine how much influence these shows are having on the public that watches them. References: Albiniak, P. (2008). Feel good in tough times. Broadcasting and Cable. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from Ebscohost Database. Austin, Anastacia Mott, New reality show ‘Moment of Truth’ makes everyone squirm. Retrievded April 24, 2008 from http://www.buzzle.com. Bauder, D. (2007). Newscasts endure ratings tug of war. Associated Press Times Union. Albany, N.Y.: Jun 27, 2007. Pg. E. 6. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from http://proquest.umi.com. Bogle, D. (2001). Primetime blues. Retrieved April 26, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com. Clark, C. (2007). Time to take responsibility for our chronic crankiness. The Salt Lake Tribune. Salt Lake City, Utah: Feb 2, 2007. Retrieved April 23, 2008 from http://proquest.umi.com. Fagan, N. (n.d). Remembering television in the 1960s. Retrieved April 26, 2008 from http://www.helium.com. Game Shows (2008) The moment of truth. Retrieved April 24, 2008 from http://gameshows.about.com Grindstaff, Laura (2008). Trashy or transgressive' “Reality TV” and the politics of social control. . Plugged In. Retrieved April 18, 2008, from http://proxy.arts.uci.edu. Hoyer, S. (2007). Reminiscence of intellectual battles. Nordicom Review Jubilee Issue (pp.183-194). Retrieved April 16, 2008 from Ebscohost Database. Miller, S. (2007). Networks get with the eco-program. Multichannel News. New York: 28(32); pg. 2A. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from http://proquest.umi.com. Ormrod, J. (1999). Social learning theory. Retrieved from http://teachnet.edb.utexas.edu. Rankin, Aubree (2008). Reality TV: Race to the Bottom. Retrieved April 19, 2008, from http://www.parentstv.org. Rowen, B. (2008) History of reality TV, info please. Retrieved April 24, 2008 from http://www.infoplease.com. Rutenberg, J. (2003). A Nation at war: The news media; Cable’s war coverage suggests a new “Fox Effect’ on television journalism. New York Times. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from http://query.nytimes.com. Soong, Roland (2003). Reality Television. Retrieved April 19, 2008, from http://www.zonalatina.com. Spring Theory Workbook. (2001). Uses and gratifications theory. Retrieved May 1, 2008, from http://www.uky.edu. Figure Captions Figure 1: Example of Neilsen prime time television rating results. Figure 2:Chart comparing viewers of reality TV according to age and gender Figure 3: Chart comparing views of Moment of Truth to Jeopardy