Week 10 – Reality TV – Origins and Contexts

One Born Every Minute is a British observational documentary that uses 40 installed cameras to witness the events taking place in a British maternity hospital. Season 1, episode 4 focuses on the experiences of Joy and Fabio,who are having their first child after 5 years of IVF. Additionally, the episode also follows soon-to-be mother of 5, Kelly.

Debuting on Channel 4 in the UK in 2010, One Born Every Minute has proven to be a success as a reality television show. Each episode commences with the same introduction and opening sequence, which outlines the purpose of the series, how there is one child born every minute in the UK, and how the footage at the maternity hospital is filmed via 40 installed cameras. These 40 cameras could be described as capturing ‘candid moments’. This is due to the fact that the cameras are always on and recording, there are no operators on the cameras (therefore no crew in the hospital), and due to the absence of the crew the patient and their families feel less encroached and more likely to behave genuinely.  Therefore, One Born Every Minute is inexpensive to produce as the talent is free.

One Born Every Minute has elements of a documentary and soap within it; television shows of this nature produce good television followings and great reviews. They are informative, yet still entertaining and relatable. The cross between a documentary and a soap is created through the editing, and in the case of One Born Every Minute, various filming techniques are tropes specific to a documentary and a soap are utilized. That being said, there are a range of categories in which a reality television show can fall under. One Born Every Minute could easily fall under the categories of: surveillance, fly-on-the wall docu-soap and reality life.

The aesthetics of a documentary and a soap are different, and hence when the two are combined, an interesting product is created.

 The technological advancements in the way of quality surveillance cameras allowed for One Born Every Minute to be recorded in footage that would be appropriate for television. Furthermore, a cultural shift towards an interest in not just celebrity lives, but also the lives of the everyday person, became a new focus. An area that previously did not get its own stage is childbirth. Prior to One Birth Every Minute, a television show exploring the same circumstances did not exist. So in order to take away from the shock and discomfort that comes from witnessing childbirth, producers had to employ a certain number of techniques to release the tension.

The narrator for One Born Every Minute is Steven Hartley. Hartley’s deep voice is one that establishes a feeling of trust from audiences, as they have the expectation he is unbiased and fair in his narration. In the case of Joy, her childbirth at the maternity hospital takes several days. Hartley’s narration (coupled with shots of ticking clocks and sunsets) fuels the narrative and allows for audiences to understand that time has been passing. This voiceover component contributes to the documentary element of the television show. In a way, it is like a David Attenborough animal documentary, where a human is giving birth and Attenborough balances inferred knowledge with informative voiceovers.

 Interviews are conducted with the family members, doctors and nurses at the maternity hospital. The interviews are set up in a very recognizable documentary style: the interviewee is sitting in front of the camera (behind which sits the interviewer/director) and the location is no longer recognizable as a hospital. The family member/nurse is prompted by questions pitched to them, for which their answers help assist the emotional link to the television show. The lower third on the screen provides the name of the interviewee and their occupation/relationship to patient – professional documentary tropes.

The other cameras generating footage are installed in stationary positions, and thus produce quite standard unobtrusive shots. There are a lot of zoom close ups to capture the drama (as cameras are situated high up on the walls), as well as long distance observational shots to provide context and allow audiences to witness the unrehearsed events and unplanned staging.

In the case of Kelly and her sister, the narrative behind their story relates to the death of their brother, and how Kelly’s newborn baby would help repair their broken emotions. This contributes to the ‘soap’ element of the show, as the narrative is character driven and gradually built by the information provided by interviewees (as well as observed events).

The narrative of the episode is constructed around tension and release: the Thai woman, Joy, has a lot of problems with her childbirth; juxtaposed with Kelly who has already had so many children and whose birth process is comical and easy. Kelly’s story is entertaining to watch, as she gets hooked on the gas (of which she allows her sister several puffs). Her obliviousness results in a tougher job for the midwives, unyet viewers can’t help but laugh, as her child birth seems far less serious than Joy’s. The climax of the episode comes with Joy’s story, which has a lot invested in it emotionally. Audiences share in her relief as she finally gives birth to a beautiful healthy boy. Again, these plot points and progression in narrative are elements of a soap.

The editing techniques employed throughout the episode help to make it entertaining. It is the editors job to pick and choose what is relevant, and how it will be presented to audiences. For instance, through the use of editing, Joy appears to consistently nag her timid and quiet husband, Fabio. It appears that Joy regularly makes stabs at her husband, however, the editor could have simply taken all the jibs Joy made at Fabio over their 7 day period at the hospital, and edited them into one concentrated 5 minute period. In doing this, the entire perception by the audience of Joy, Fabio and their marriage can easily be manipulated. Essentially the editing is made to look awkward. Scenes are drawn out to an awkward, lingering length, and the editor is always working to either achieve the soap or drama effect. Light background music is also used throughout the episode to transition from event to event and also to trigger emotion (e.g. when Joy finally gives birth).

References:

Wikipedia, (2014). One Born Every Minute. [online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Born_Every_Minute [Accessed 19 Oct. 2014].

Week 7 – ‘It’s not TV, it’s HBO’: Branding, Genre, ‘Quality TV’

Girls revolves around four 20-something girls who live in New York City. Just by that one sentence, many stereo-typical ideas can be generated around what Girls is about, and mainly, how it will differ from every other television series set in New York City. Basically, it seems like the idea of girls in New York has been done before:

• Cashmere Mafia (2008) follows the lives of four ambitious women, longtime best friends since their days at business school…
• Sex and the City (1998) which revolved around the sex lives of 4 different women who are inseparable and feminine…
• Lipstick Jungle (2008) is a dramedy following three powerful women (who are best friends, all of whom are top professionals in their respective careers…
• and Gossip Girl (2007), which as the title suggests, is all about the gossip surrounding teenagers trying to stay alive in the high school battlefields.

Whilst the character archetypes will seem quite familiar, writer and main character of Girls, Lena Dunham, reveals that Girls is different to its predecessos, in the sense that she wanted “[Girls] to fill in a gap in TV for women this age… 24 to 25-that seems like an age that is so specific and that hasn’t been done.”

This strong need to fill the gap for the viewers in their mid-twenties was one of the main factors as to why HBO picked up Girls. This strongly generation focused show was an attempt by HBO to broaden its audience age gaps and to keep up with fierce competitors. As of July 2014, Netflix announced that their subscriber revenue had just surpassed that of HBO, with Netflix taking in $1.146 billion compared to $1.141 billion for HBO.Netflix does take in more money per subscriber because it doesn’t have to split the revenue with cable distributors, as HBO does. (http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/07/media/netflix-hbo/).

Netflix and HBO have made no secret of their rivalry. According to Jason Abbruzzese, writer for Mashable, “the main difference between the two [is that] HBO is a premium cable company with a long track record of original content; Netflix has a rich-yet-eclectic library and made a recent entry into original programming.” This brings me to my discussion on HBO’s idea around ‘originality’ and quality television.

When watching the relatively new HBO series, Girls, one can easily be confused as to what genre it belongs to. As “genres are cultural products constituted by media practices and subject to ongoing change and redefinition” (Mittell 2004), we can say that Girls doesn’t necessarily belong to one of the more ‘traditional’ genres; but rather, it is a hybrid genre. It is a combination of drama and comedy, and could perhaps be seen as slightly anti-romace.

Before watching Girls, I had a certain stigma attached to the show even though I knew nothing about it. I assumed it would be light, humorous and empowering. Instead, the show was at times confronting, awkward and cringeworthy – in a good way. Girls creates scenarios and situations which are all too well known and common for women in their mid-twenties. It depicts a more realistic and sincere reflection of life as a woman in their 20’s.

Lena Dunham plays Hannah, the main character which Dunham wrote inspired by “parts of [her] that [she] find the most shameful”. Hannah makes the mistakes and says the things audiences will never admit they’ve done themselves. And this makes her compelling TV. Girls is laced with realistic situations revolving around casual sex, drugs, relationships, unemployment and financial problems. But these dramatic topics do not hit hard due to the tasteful balance with comedy. Whist this aids the show in being unique, it also means that Girls has received a lot of criticism for negative representation of the current generation; the idea that these 20 somethings’ are victims who let things happen to them casts the show in a negative light. But this is where Girls differs from other female orientated shows. Instead of shunning promiscuity and multiple sexual relationships, Dunham uses the character of Jessa to explore it:

“I’m offended by all the ‘supposed-tos’. I don’t like women telling other women what to do or how to do it or when to do it. Everytime I have sex, it’s my choice. If I wanted to go on some dates I would. But I don’t.” – Jessa, S01E02

This is a direct link to modern discussion on feminism. Dunham, in her interview with Claire Danes, explains how the common preconceived idea that “our moms covered the feminism thing and now we’re living in a post-that world” is completely untrue. “The idea that the feminism conversation could be cool again and not just feel like some granola BS is so exciting to me.” In a way, Girls allows Dunham the opportunity to put forth her thoughts on women and feminism in today’s modern society (which links into history and audience orientation). Instead of girls hating on other girls for sleeping around (such as in Gossip Girl), and instead of presenting the perfect, unflawed main character (such as in New Girl) Dunham has created a show which takes these common motifs and flips them no their side. Instead, flawed women are empowering other women in a world where situations are completely relatable and realistic. The episodes are laced with tropes which Dunham believes is interesting to us, and the scenes go on for longer than expected and don’t necessarily focus on the main point of action. In doing this, we are drawn into the characters lives and feel as if the drama is real, not a fantasy (as it is in so many other unobtainable worlds in other television shows).

The HBO label is “It’s not TV. It’s HBO.” which essentially translate to HBO being different to/better than normal TV. Moving to more original drama in the 1980’s, HBO shows feature high amounts of swearing, sexual themes, violence and nudity – providing more racier shows than those which are aired to free-to-air television. Girls fits perfectly into this criteria and so, it neatly works for the networks identity and brand.

There is a wide range of television series’ which fit under the category of ‘quality television’, and it can be said that Girls is one of those shows. Girls is what HBO considers to be a television show that can draw you in. Instead of being a episode to episode show (such as NCIS where there is a problem and it is resolved within one episode with a clear beginning, middle and end), girls is an ongoing, complex narrative. The lives of the four main characters are not resolved within one episode, but linger over several. There is a deeper, richer story which is explored as the series progresses.

So what does this say about where television is heading? A television show with a title primarily focused on one gender may have once segregated an audience, but now ceases to. Girls easily translates to both genders, and has the capability to draw in multiple generations. Where its main focus is girls in their mid 20’s, women older than this can relate to the characters in a time in their past. It could be said that this television show is almost soul reflection.

Resources:

Abbruzzese, J. (2014). Get a Room Already: Why HBO and Netflix Are Obsessed With Each Other. [online] Mashable. Available at: http://mashable.com/2014/08/07/netflix-hbo-love-hate-relationship/ [Accessed 5 Oct. 2014]

Danes, C. (2014). Film Interview: Lena Dunham. [online] Interview Magazine. Available at: http://www.interviewmagazine.com/film/lena-dunham-1/#page2 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2014].

Settembre, J. (2014). HBO’s hit series ‘Girls’ is getting backlash for its depiction of New Yorkers as shiftless losers. [online] New York Daily News. Available at: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/hbo-girls-backlash-article-1.1571491 [Accessed 10 Oct. 2014].

Wikipedia, (2014). Girls (TV series). [online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girls_(TV_series) [Accessed 9 Oct. 2014].

Wikipedia, (2014). HBO. [online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBO#Original_programming [Accessed 4 Oct. 2014].

From Broadcast to Post-Broadcast (Week 3)

The post-broadcast era can largely be credited to changes in television institutions, technologies related to production, distribution and consumption, audience practices and aesthetic sensibilities. Many television shows extend beyond the television screens to other platforms under what’s called “transmedia storytelling”.

Using the example of the Uninspired webisode, I will discuss the several characteristics of a post-broadcast era.

Multi-platform television is a mode of storytelling which plays out across a number of different entertainment channels. Uninspired takes the form of a television series, but instead of being broadcasted on TV, it is on the internet (hence the term webisode). It works well for online viewing as it is short, cute and witty. Audiences are able to customise their screening experience by choosing their playback quality, subtitles and whether they want to watch in full screen or not. This makes the Uninspired series more accessible and portable.

Bringing me to the next characteristic of a post-broacast era. Viewers do not need to be tuning into a particular station at a certain time in order to see the Uninspired webisodes. They do not even need to be at a television. The videos can be accessed online through their phones, tablets or computers, thanks to the internet and Web 2.0. The audience demand for accessibility is granted by allowing the episodes to be accessed on a range of different technologies at a range of different times.

The script of Uninspired is laced with dry humour. It is a certain type of humour that would appeal largely to a younger audience. This target audience coincides conveniently with the fact that the episodes are only accessible online, as it is believed that younger generations are naturally more comfortable with using technology and seeking out material online. Furthmore, a number of different readings could be generated from the viewing of Uninspired. Some could definitely find it offensive. When the customer service assistant at the liquor store compliments the main character on her age and proceeds to say his friend is ‘into karate’, that would appear to be an offensive stereotype. But the series itself is targeted towards a more tolerant audience who are comfortable with blurring the lines of political correctness. And so, Uninspired demonstrates how in a post-broadcast era, there is definitely a shift from an educational focus to more entertainment driven material.

Stylistically, the way Uninspired is filmed is quite cinematic and professional. Whilst it may appear to be quite low budget (mainly found distributed through their website, YouTube and IndieWire), it still manages to deliver a polished piece of work. If this series had to be broadcasted on television, it would have to be altered in extreme ways to suit the profile of a television program.

Whilst the episode is short and seems to flow well, it is still slightly segmented. By watching it, as a viewer, you feel like you have watched several stages of Sarah’s day: she progresses from losing her job, seeing her boyfriend, seeing her best friend and then meeting a new friend. Just like a television series where each segment before the advertisements has a minor cliffhanger or turning point which brings back the viewer after the advertisement break, so too does Uninspired follow a similar narrative structure. Whilst the long term narrative will continue on beyond the first episode, there is still some sort of resolution at the end of the episode so that viewers feel satisfied that they have watched a narrative that has been resolved. In the case of Uninspired, Sarah meets a new friend. Temporarily, the compromising situation of unemployment is relieved.

Which brings me back to a discussion of the post-broadcast era. Shows like Uninspired are specific to a niche audience – an audience which can be reached and inspired in other ways than just through a television screen. Instead of television choosing the programs and shows they want to broadcast, audiences are able to find the material that they actually want to see. No longer is it standard for families to watch television shows together in the family room. Instead, televisions have migrated out of the domestic living room and can now be found in bedrooms, offices, cafes, gyms etc. There is a different viewing experience related to the consumption of television just as there are different modes for its production. Instead of working around television, television works around us.

In his discourse, Remediation: understanding new media, David Bolter adopts the word ‘remediation’ in order to express the way in which the remediation of one medium is seen in contemporary culture as improving on another medium. A movie based on a novel, a written description of a photograph, a painting reproduced in a gallery in cyberspace: this is remediation (Farrell). Each new medium is justified because it fills a lack or repairs a fault in its predecessor. With television, our desire for immediacy had us witnessing the development of digital technologies as a shift from the use of analogue practises. Television shows can be viewed by DVD or can even be downloaded illegally through a torrent. We can now tweet our opinions about things happening on screen and can also vote by SMS to directly effect an outcome of a television show e.g. Big Brother (voting), The Block (tweeting). These interactions heighten the involvement of audiences and brings individuals together through mutual involvement in a television series.

Furthermore, if episodes have been missed, the online website will most likely have an online collection of all episodes related to the television show, including exclusive behind the scenes material or interviews. In the post-broadcast era, Television shows have transcended their limitations of being just on screen and have infiltrated a number of different mediums hence the term transmedia.

Sources:

Bolter, J. David, 1999, Remediation: understanding new media, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Farrell, N, ZoneZero.com. n.d. The Self-Perpetuating Vicious Circle of Media Chasing Reality Chasing Media. [online] Available at: http://zonezero.com/magazine/articles/nell/remediation.html [Accessed: 23 Aug 2014].

From Broadcast to Post-Broadcast (Week 2)

For so long, television has been a part of our culture and a part of our daily rituals. Whilst whatever and whoever behind the screen is someone we may or may not have met, it is very easy for news presenters, sportspeople or actors to become household names. According to Raymond Williams, there are a number of different interpretations as to how and why television has come to be such an invaluable part of todays society; however, one statement he believes to be true in all, is that “television has altered our world”. This idea is related to social change and technological determinism – where technology drives the development of social structure.

At present, we are obsessed with receiving information as soon as it happens. We want to be up to date and informed. The news is an example of television broadcasting which acts as a social glue. It provides the same information in the same manner to all people in the public sphere. It reinforces that everyones view is equal.

Channel 7 News

The news still remains to be one of the traditional ideas of what broadcast television is.  Originally, information would be reported over the radio, but with the technology break through, a new medium of visuals added an extra element to receiving news. The news is deliberately scheduled to coincide with maximum viewing times (and when the average Australian worker comes home from work).

There are many features of broadcast news which, when looking at the television screen, communicates that we are watching a news program. We have come to respect and appreciate the news anchor and his/her formality. They have a sense of authority, intimacy and professionalism, communicating the idea that the information relayed carries equal importance.  The background behind the anchor is the main CBD buildings of the state where the news is broadcasted from. In the segment we watched in the screening, the anchor was in front of the Sydney Harbour bridge, a landmark thought to be the heart of Australia and hence is another signifier of the community around the news broadcast.

The segments and stories throughout the news hour are smoothly transitioned between one another. Whilst 1 hour can contain an incredibly complex  amount of information, the regular commercial breaks (marked by the anchor and hence contributing the the sense of liveness) work to promote a sense of planned flow. There are no obvious breaks when introducing new material, but rather, the anchor does an excellent job of bringing the stories together. The camera work, mode of address and narrative framing all contribute to the feel of broadcast news.

What is being offered is not, in older terms, a programme of discrete units with particular insertions, but a planned flow, in which the true series is not the published sequence of programme items but this sequence transformed by the inclusion of another kind of sequence, so that these sequences together compose the real flow, the real ‘broadcasting’.  – Williams

A show which does an excellent job at satirising the news is The Daily Show.

The Daily Show  

Whilst the Daily Show is excellent at running through many different topics and stitching them together in an an almost perfect flow, it is not exactly like the formal news programs. In fact, the show describes itself as a ‘fake news’ program. It takes a different spin on the news, but employs a lot of the same techniques: news anchor, city backdrop, formal headings at the bottom of the screen, music etc.

This show came about due to America’s love of freedom of speech and independence. Jon Stewart is unlike a professional news anchor, but rather, more of a stand up comedian who is fearless enough to criticise and single out other news programs and their stories. Whilst the formal, 6pm nightly news is popular with mature and more informed members of the public, The Daily Show targets an audience between 18 to 49. 43% of viewers have been recorded as watching the show purely for entertainment purposes. The same could not be said about a serious news show.

Whilst the nightly news communicates understandable and useful information, in order to enjoy The Daily Show, audiences must have a greater understanding of American humour and satire. The live audience encourages viewers to understand when jokes are being made, and in turn, that these jokes are actually funny. Live broadcast news does not have this live audience nor lack of journalistic responsibility. In a way, The Daily Show tears down the somewhat professional barrier that lies between broadcast news and the viewers, and instead channels into the audiences social desire for honest, intimate relationships (a journalists personalised blog will provide a different relay of events than a news program due to political alignments).

Whilst the argument can be made that there is an expiration date on broadcast television, we will always need it.  There will always be events which will require mass communication i.e. The National Indigenous Apology, live sports coverage etc. Additionally, broadcast television allows social rituals to be upheld, such as watching television as a family. But, despite this, we have as a society developed something called a post-broadcast era. This will be discussed more in Blog Post 3.

Sources:

Williams, R. (1974). Television, Technology and Cultural Form. 1st ed. [ebook] London: Schocken Books. Available at: http://www.qiu.ir/Files/110/Document/General/1391/7/29/1abd3be96e794ffbbabe5734a985994e.pdf [Accessed 24 Aug. 2014].