Rise of Females in Primetime

DJ Mahoney

Television, like most inventions, began in a time of male dominance. Male news anchors, producers, writers, and actors filled our TV schedule from sun up to late night. From its early start, television focused on the uses and gratification theory; why did people watch this TV show and what are they getting out of it? In some of today’s most popular shows; however, women do the main roles not only on camera but also behind the scenes. These women are beginning to run television and shape the themes and topics our audiences will grasp.

In Baran and Davis’ ninth chapter, they mention active-audience theories as a way to focus on what people are doing with the media they intake. Today, one of the easiest way to observe this theory is through social media networks, namely Twitter. Thousands of users will tweet about the shows they watch as a way to connect with fellow viewers, get their points across in public, and reaffirm their views. For those doing research on these active-audience theories, they simply have to search a hash tag for any popular show. An article on VideoMind states that in the 2011-2012 season, the shows most tweeted about were Glee, American Idol, Pretty Little Liars, and Love and Hip Hop; all shows whose main audience is women in their teens or 20s. These are not the most watched shows, according to the Neilsen’s “Tops of 2012” article, where it breaks down the most watched primetime shows in 2012 season. So why are these shows the ones with the most communication? It is because the audience watching is more likely to tweet or post their feelings about the episodes or because these shows are aligning with society and bringing up current issues that lead to open communication between people?

The most recent issue of Entertainment Weekly had a segment on “The Women Who Run TV” after a Golden Globes season that honored the amazing work of several bright female actresses. EW chose to highlight some of them and their writers to see their feelings on having a strong presence on the TV screen. Claire Danes, Emmy winner for her role in Homeland was quoted for her thoughts on the hit winning show’s writing. After a few episodes into the series, the writers felt that they needed a female’s perspective to better illustrate the main character’s persona. Meredith Stiehm was selected and already came into the group with similarities towards the female lead; they both work in male dominated fields (Stiehm is Showtime network’s sole female writer and Danes’ character works in the CIA) and both have experience with bipolar disorder (Stiehm’s sister suffers with the disease as does Danes’ character). When asked about having a female writer on staff, Danes replied, “She’s really incredible. Her voice is so distinctive and so honest and funny. She has a very wry sensibility that’s so in keeping with who Carrie is.  But she also is very warm and feeling and all of that translates into all her work. I owe an enormous amount to Meredith”.

In the textbook, the authors discussed a study done by Janice Radway in 1984 that conducted a study on women’s reactions to romance novels. Radway argues that these plots are based off of “patriarchal myths in which a male-dominated social order is assumed to be both natural and just…women must gain their identity through their association with a male character.” (260) Today, most women would agree that they do not live in a world where the males in their life identify them. I see Radway’s statement as the men playing the role of an influencer or a role model and that some women today are still looking for those roles but in different places. Lena Dunham has created a natural and just portrayal of everyday women who can fill the role of an influencer. Her award-winning show, Girls, follows a small group of twenty-somethings living in New York City trying to find themselves and their future. The show’s openness and authenticity is what is attracting viewers, causing them to comment and communicate their reactions not only with one another but also with their social media friends. With role models such as Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, Dunham’s comedic genius is new age and extremely relatable; she has also been referred as “today’s Woody Allen” for her work on screen.

With today’s generation and future generations to come, it is essential that artists use television as a way to relay messages. Using the old motto, “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em”, women are using this media outlet to show the endless possibilities that one can achieve. With its current success, I feel as though shows with strong females both on and off screen will be the ones to prevail for years to come.

Works Cited

Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future. Sixth ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Pub., 2012. Print.

Dowling, Eleanor. "Key Trends from the 2012 Social TV Season – INFOGRAPHIC."VideoMind. VideoMind, 11 June 2012. Web. 17 Feb. 2013.

Stack, Tim. "The Women Who Run TV: 'Homeland' Writer Meredith Stiehm on Claire Danes, New FX Pilot." EW.com. Enterainment Weekly, 4 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2013.

Staff, EW. "This Week's Cover: Lena Dunham, the Beautiful (and Dirty) Mind behind 'Girls'" EW.com. Enterainment Weekly, 30 Jan. 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2013.

Violence in the Media

Brandon Schindler

One trending topic that seems to be prominent in the media, is violence on television. Every day when I sit down and turn on the television and watch programs like NCIS and Law and Order: SVU, I see shooting, killing, and fighting. Throughout my research for this blog I seem to have stumbled upon the reason that there is violence on television. One example that I will talk about later in this posting is the new show called The Following.

In the article on Broadcasting and Cable, entitled “The Brutal Truth About TV Violence”, written by Paige Albioniak, John Eggerton, Jon Lafayette and Andrea Morabito it says “Washington does not regulate violence”(Albiniak et al.). In summary as stated in the article “when bloodied corpses are shown on almost a nightly basis, no one says much because there’s nothing Washington can do about it, as per current media rules of law”(Albiniak et al.).  The article goes on to talk about advertisers as well. This is where we will revisit the talk about the show The Following. Before we get into the The Following, there was a comment made about the type of programming that advertisers would want to be part of. In that paragraph there was no mention of advertisers wanting to have their adds in shows that have violence in them (Albiniak et al.).  In the article, when talking about advertising, it appears as if advertisers are weary of this new show (Albiniak et al.).  The big concern for advertisers, as I understand it, is the content of the show (Albiniak et al.).  To connect this all together, there may not be regulations as far as violence on television is concerned, but it would seem as if this type of programming could take a hit in other places. This article seems to illustrate some of the tension that seems to be taking place in the industry.

The next article also deals with violence in the media in a bit of a different way than the first did. This article makes a parallel between content in shows like The Following, and events that are happening in real life (Carter).  It dealt with content of the shows in relation to the real life events by gathering opinions of employees from various television channels (Carter).   This is a New York Times article called “Real-World Killings Pressure TV Fiction” composed by Bill Carter. The first opinion in the article came from the chairman for entertainment, Kevin Reilly, at Fox (Carter). Some of the highlights of his thoughts were that he acknowledged that the timing of the Sandy Hook shooting was not good for The Following (Carter).  On the other hand he does make the points that shows with violence in them are very popular (Carter).  The overarching idea here is that events like Sandy Hook do have an effect on shows, like The Following, but even though those events did take place, the shows must go forward (Carter). Within one of his statements, Reilly, had made reference to issues such as trying to keep up with cultural code, the censure’s of content, and having to contend with shows on cable (Carter).  The president of Entertainment at CBS, Nina Tassler, thought that everything that went on the air is appropriate, even with the events that took place (Carter).  One last opinion that seemed to weigh on the article is that of John Landgraf, president of FX, said “Our greatest fear is death, and if you want to rivet people, you’re going to tend to hover around questions of life and death because that’s the thing that rivets our attention most naturally” (Carter).   After this article, there could be a connection made that even though there is still violence in shows like The Following, outside events could still have an impact.

In summary all these different shows that have violence in them seem to be very appealing to many viewers out there today. To tie this posting back to one of the course readings, I want to refer to Baran and Davis’s book Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future, more specifically entertainment theory. There are two concepts from this theory that I would like to use. “Entertainment theorists assume that most of us don’t think enough about this content to have very useful insights about it. We’re just doing what feels good-after all, it’s only entertainment” (Baran and Davis 263).

Works Cited

Albiniak, Paige, Eggerton, John, Lafayette, Jon and Morabito, Andrea. “The Brutal Truth About TV Violence.” Broadcasting & Cable. 24 Dec. 2012. Web. 16 Feb. 2013. http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/491012-The_Brutal_Truth_About_TV_Violence.php

Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass Communication Theory:
Foundations, Ferment, and Future. Sixth ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth
Pub., 2012. Print.

Carter, Bill. “Real-World Killings Pressure TV Fiction.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 13 Jan. 2013. Web. 16 Feb. 2013 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/14/arts/television/real-violence-puts-pressure-on-tv-fiction.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

Competitive Framing

Framing is a technique used by the news media on a daily basis.  Framing seeks to affect news media audience in their consumption of the news.  Framing refers to utilizing audience expectations to help make sense of a story or an issue.  One common way in which the news media seeks to frame stories is focusing on the winners and losers of a particular issue or an event or transforming the issue into a competition between opposing sides, similar to how many sports games are reported.  This technique usually is seen with campaigns or issues where there are two or distinct viewpoints.

An example of issue that is often framed in such a way and is currently in public interest would be gun control.  An example of an article that frames the gun control issue as competition between two sides would be the New York Times article, "Colorado Gun Control Proposals Face Fight" by Jack Healy.  Healy describes the Colorado discussion of modifying gun control proposal as "a crucial stage for the battle over gun-control legislation".  The article quotes State Representative Rhonda Fields, who lost her gun to gun violence, as saying, "It will be a fight" when speaking about the "political battle".  In his reporting on a tension filled news conference, Healy goes as far to express that "Rumblings of the fight showed themselves quickly at the news conference where the measures were announced."  In the same paragraph he places a sly comment from a gun advocate about the farmers and ranchers selling; Healy states "Dudley Brown, a staunch gun advocate muttered, 'It'll make them felons.'"  Healy interjects these contentious words and phrases, as well as chooses emotion-filled quotes to frame his article.  He is not simply reporting that there is going to be an intense political discussion about the proposed gun-control measures.  His use of these words, phrases and quotes paint an image of combative "battle".  The term battle alone implies there will be winners and losers.  The new measures are not even fully mentioned in the article, just that there will be a political battle over them.  Healy's article reinforces the idea that the fight over the measures are more important than the actual measures themselves.

As previously mentioned campaign reporting is often guilty of framing their stories in the vein of winners in losers.  The recent Presidential and Congressional elections would be an example of framing in such a way.  The focus by many media outlets were not on the debate of issues and policies, but who was ahead in the polls.  According to Dave Eggerton's article titled, "Pew: President Draws A Critical Crowd During Primaries" from the trade publication Broadcasting and Cable, which sites a Pew study about the Republican primaries of 2012, "So-called horserace coverage - strategy, momentum, polls, advertising and fundraising - continued to far outpace policy and public record, accounting for 64% of the coverage compared to 12% on their personal lives, 11% on policy and only 6% on their public records".  Rather than focusing on public records, which would appear to be an important aspect to look at the competence of candidates running for President, the coverage focused more on who had better polling numbers or had a surging momentum on the campaign trail that month.  While obviously the elections are political events where there have to be winners and losers, the Pew study showcases that the discussion of who is winning and who is losing has become the dominant way in which election coverage is framed.
An article from the BBC News Magazine titled, "The shared language of sports and politics"  by Nick Bryant demonstrates just how interchangeable the language of sports and politics have become.  The article is littered with common sports phrases that are now commonly used to describe different political events.  It declares that it is presidential campaign politics where sports jargon has become most prevalent.  For example the article cites commentary about the anticipation of Obama's Democratic National Convention Speech.  Bryant states, "this was how the veteran commentator Mark Shields framed Barack Obama's address (or, as he described the speech in a panel discussion on the American television network PBS, his at bat). 'He can't get by with a ground rule double tonight (when a batter is allowed to advance to second base when the ball has bounced out of the playing area). He has got to hit a home run.'"  This section from Bryant's article showcases that competitive sports jargon can easily be slipped into reporting on politics.  It also showcases that the news media is not simply reporting what is happening in the news, but they are also commenting.  Commentators, who are often journalists or supposed experts of field, are often used in television news.  Commentators are just another tool that can help to frame a story after the facts are presented to the audience.

So what is the meaning behind this framing?  Why is it so important?  In the frame analysis theory, framing is used to experience a primary reality.  According to Goffman the primary reality refers "the real world in which people and events obey certain conventional and widely accepted rules" (Barran, 334).  One could argue the framing of news stories with the use of competitive language or sports jargon creates an accepted culture of competition.  Going along with this argument, just like in Healy's gun-control story where the details of gun-control measures don't matter as much as the battle of the measures, this framing reinforces the idea that winning, whatever one defines that as, is most important.  Framing in the news media is a notable because it is what is used to help us understand news stories, as well as define our experiences in life.

Works Cited
Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future. Sixth ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Pub., 2012. Print.

Bryant, Nick. "The Shared Language of Sport and Politics." BBC News. BBC, 27 Sept. 2012. Web. 09 Feb. 2013.

Eggerton, John. "Pew: President Draws A Critical Crowd During Primaries." Broadcasting Cable RSS. NewBay Media, LLC, 23 Apr. 2012. Web. 09 Feb. 2013.

Healy, Jack. "Colorado Gun Control Proposals Face Fight." The New York Times. The New York Times, 06 Feb. 2013. Web. 09 Feb. 2013.

Welcome to our blog!

This is the class blog for MSS 495 B: Media Influence, the Media Studies capstone course at Quinnipiac University in Hamden, CT.