My apologies for this post coming up late.
Tomorrow in section we will be looking at Streeter's "Blue Skies and Strange Bedfellows" and Bodroghkozy's "The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour and the Youth Rebellion." As you're prepping, start thinking about examples from any TV era that relate to the concepts, theories, and ideas that you're reading about - let's make some connections!
Discussion questions:
- What are the blue skies discourses Streeter discusses? What different organizations, groups of people, and other stakeholders promoted these discourses, and for what reasons?
- Who are the strange bedfellows when it came to pushing for cable policy and distribution? Why are they so strange? What about cable made it possible for these disparate groups to agree with each other?
- Who was the audience of the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour? How did the show's audience contribute to the show becoming a political battleground? What changes did they make to the traditional variety show form as part of their audience-getting strategy?
- Outline the trajectory of the Hour's comedic material/intention. How did it reflect or channel social changes happening in the US at the time? What taboo topics did the show engage with that drew in particular audiences? When and how did entertainment slip into editorialization?
See y'all soon!
Josh
PS: Your bonus fun video for today: the every important Buggles. Cable's coming, and it's allllll changing from here on out.
Start: look like completely harmless brothers, short hair, nice outfits.
ReplyDeleteIn beginning had some political intentions but were ambiguous
did not intend to be political
brought on writer friends who were more liberal, started to influence the writing
grew increasingly liberal and politicized over time
to point where they became obvious about their views
show became increasingly geared toward counterculture, young people
but were able to frame these things in a way to appeal to everyone at first
did not want “sweetening”- no fake laughs, wanted show to appeal to audience that was actually there.
This correlated much with Vietnam, after the Tet offensive many people started to see the war as not right anymore.
censorship- started using press to let people know about what was happening, gave them credence with leftist groups that they were trying to go against the machine.
taboo topics- psychadelic drugs, the war, censorship
CBS did not allow them to show violence in clips of chicago protests even though CBS had shown the violence in news coverage of them
“Spectators could be seen in every shot and from every camera angle. The most notable characteristic of these spectators was that they were almost uniformly young and “hip” looking.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlfYmwPvono
clip of Leigh French being pulled from the audience as hippie chick “Goldie O’Keefe”
this applies to our reading- shows how counterculture was represented in the show in an ambiguous way. She discussed the taboo topics of the time while getting past censorship with her double meanings.
The Smothers Brothers targeted the teen audience. “It was scheduled on Sunday night to play opposite NBC’s perennially top-rated family westerns, Bonanza, and was supposed to appeal to a younger audience.” The younger generation was more liberal than their parents and that showed in the program as it tried to appeal to the teen audience. “The show functioned as a site for generational and ideological battles over the Vietnam War, the psychedelic drug culture, and other aspects of antiestablishment youth dissent.” This show served as a two-way feedback system. While the show sparked debate, it also fed off its audience which gave the show more impetus to talk about issues that would engage the younger generation they’re targeting. A comedic platform gave the shows writers a competitive edge by allowing to introduce controversial and political issues other shows were unable to. Some changes included the Goldie O’Keefe character. She’s described as Gracie Allen, a tribute to vaudeville, meets hippy culture. Additionally, they frequently used slang, such as tea and seeds, as references to drugs in order to appeal to appeal to teens and to get around censorship.
ReplyDeleteThis clip complies three “Editorial” sketches with Pat Paulsen. This format allowed them to bring up controversial issues in a lighthearted format which appealed to their younger, and increasingly political audience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4kWLUnorTU
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2
ReplyDeleteNew cable technology brought together “an odd alliance between the Community Antenna Television (CATV) industry, certain professional groups, and some liberal professional organizations” (222). The groups working together all had individual hopes and goals for cable which were put aside to support the development of the technology to replace the failings of the existing television system. Of course, the “strange bedfellows” avoided discussion of how cable would not, in fact, help many people in the US and was not as great of a change as they had made it out to be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRDvY_anJdc
The Watts riots shows that access to cable television isn’t going to solve social issues of poverty and racism. In short, cable doesn’t bring society to their goals of equality and keeps power in the hands of the elite.
“At roughly the same time, another call for alternatives appeared in a very different environment. This was the work of several economists who argued that existing television structure ‘unnaturally’ restricted economic competition and program diversity” (232).
The blue skies discourses were shaped by the economic and social forces. Everyone had their own ideas, interests, etc. but were brought together by the idea that "the sky is the limit". Therefore, cable was this very utopic idea and meant something different to each different group. Streeter focuses on 5 different centers of enthusiasm: “a collection of progressives interested in fostering more democratic forms of communication, the cable operators themselves, a group of economists concerned with regulatory problems, liberal elites interested in fostering alternatives to the existing commercial television system, and a group of influential policymakers . . . who were interested in centralizing the management of the telecommunications system within a government agency” (228).
ReplyDeleteThis clip demonstrates one of the discourses cable faced. Should it be free or not?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqKdQP64jOM