What is your favorite media source? What is your favorite
television show or film? Why do you watch? There are many different reasons for
media usage and the gratification we derive from our usage. According to
Stanley J. Baran and Dennis K. Davis, the “uses-and-gratifications approach” is
defined as the “approach to media study focusing on the uses to which people
put media and the gratifications they seek from those uses” (Baran, Davis 245).
Herta Hertzog started this theory as she studied how and why people listened to
the radio. Essentially, Hertzog created the study of fans and their importance.
It is important that media researchers study fans and what they are seeking in
their experience when participating as an audience member.
According to Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch, audiences are
very active. “Of course, it cannot be denied that media exposure often has a
casual origin; the issue is whether, in addition, patterns of media use are
shaped by more or less definite expectations of what certain kinds of content
have to offer the audience member” (Blumer, Gurevitch, & Katz 164). As
audience members to the media, we have certain expectations. We expect comedies
to be funny, romantic comedies to have happy endings, and dramas to make us cry
or even leave us at the edge of our seats. But aside from expectations within
television or films, as audience members, we have expectations and purposes for
watching these media texts in the first place. Why do we pick up newspapers or
magazines? Why do we frequently log on to Facebook or Twitter? Why do we tune
in every Monday night to our favorite lowbrow reality television show? Are we
actually fans or are we just casual viewers of the exposure?
We see with the Nielsen ratings media researchers are not receiving
adequate information on the “uses and gratifications” each audience has when
watching a particular show. Ratings essentially answer the questions of what
shows had the largest audiences (What TV Ratings Really Mean 2). I researched
the top ten shows with the largest audience for the week of March 5-11. The
number one show that was listed was “American Idol” with 18.69 million viewers.
That being said, what are the demographics and psychographics of the audience?
What were their uses for tuning in? Were they active fans? Do they watch every
season or just this one? Do they know someone who was on the show or
auditioned? Do they like watching the talent? Do they watch it for the personal
stories of the contestants? Do they like watching the judges? Are they leaving
their televisions on for background noise while they do other things? Are they
waiting for the show to come on after American Idol or were they already watching
the FOX network? Is it a family activity to gather around and watch the show
because it appeals to all ages? Did the viewer just happen to turn it on for
the first time that day? All of these questions cannot be answered through the Nielsen
ratings. We do not know the gratifications people received after watching American
Idol either. Did they feel enjoyment? Were they entertained? Did they laugh at
the judges’ comments? Did they get angry if the judges made cruel remarks
towards their favorite contestant? Did they tear up when their favorite contestant
was sent home? The ratings tell us how many people watched a show however researchers
do not know why the audience watched it or how they felt before or after the
viewing. We do not know their reasoning for watching a particular show or what
they got out of it.
So what do you all think? Do you think the rating systems
are a good example of studying the uses and gratifications of audiences?
Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future.
Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Katz, Elihu, Jay G. Blumler, and Michael Gurevitch.
"Communication Theory/Uses and Gratifications." - Wikibooks, Open Books for an Open World. Web. 18 Mar. 2012.
<http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Communication_Theory/Uses_and_Gratifications>.
"Nielsen Ratings: New Series on CBS, ABC Enjoy Their
Best Weeks | Recordonline.com." Recordonline.com.
Associated Press, 16 Mar. 2012. Web. 18 Mar. 2012.
<http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120316/ENTERTAIN/203160313/-1/SITEMAP>.
I believe we are both fans and casual viewers of the media. Although I watch a lot of television, my favorite media source is the Internet. In Mass Communication Theory, Baran and Davis examine the uses- and gratification research on different characteristics of Internet applications. According to the book, “Asynchroneity means that mediated messages ‘may be staggered in time. Senders and receivers of electronic messages can read mail at different times and still interact at their convenience’” (251). I completely agree that the Internet is the most convenient media outlet. I can easily use the Internet whenever I want to, while multi-tasking and searching for different things at once.
ReplyDeleteOne of the reasons why I use Twitter and Facebook is to keep in touch with people. Baran and David write, “Boneva, Kraut, and Frohlich (2001) report that women find e-mail more useful than do men in maintaining social relationships.” They continue, “They demonstrated increasing use of e-mail by women to keep in touch with family friends” (251). I found this quote to be very interesting. My mom is constantly on Facebook talking to her friends and family and e-mailing people. My dad on the other hand, has no interest whatsoever in joining Facebook and e-mailing his friends about his day. My parents definitely apply to the finding that women use e-mail to connect with friends more often.
I agree with Jennifer when she says that the rating systems are not a good example of studying the uses and gratifications of audiences. The Nielsen ratings are just useful for estimating the amount of viewers for programs on television. What TV Ratings Really Mean states, “The ratings numbers that you may read about in the newspaper are the ‘average audience rating,’ or the percent of television viewers tuned to a particular program during the average minute” (What Ratings Really Mean, 2). The Nielsen Company rates the #1 show by who has the largest audience, rather than recording people’s thoughts on which show is their favorite and why.
I believe there are a lot of explanations to why American Idol is the number one show on television. I definitely think that one of the reasons why it is so popular is because it has a wide range of viewers. Since the show appeals to all ages, it is a perfect program for families to watch together and bond. I end up turning on American Idol sometimes because it is on at a convenient time to watch TV. Mass Communication Theory describes author Wilbur Schramm’s definition of fraction of selection. The book states, “Schramm’s graphic description of how individuals make media and content choices based on expectation of reward and effort required” (245). Since American Idol is aired right after dinner when you have some down time, you don’t have to go through the hassle of DVRing it or changing your schedule/plans to watch it. The show is also based off competition and talent, which gives families and friends a lot to talk about. Being able to voice your own opinion and call in to vote for your favorite singer also makes viewers feel like they are involved and important. According to an article in the Guardian, American Idol winner Taylor Hicks drew more votes than any president in a US election (Sweney). These are all just assumptions of why I believe viewers tune in to watch American Idol. Like Jennifer wrote, “We do not know their reasoning for watching a particular show or what they got out of it.”
Work Cited
Sweney, M.. "American idol outvotes the president." The Guardian. 2006. Web. 19 Mar 2012. .
My favorite media source is the internet, with television coming to a close second. The internet breeds so much information, and with smartphones we now have an unlimited access to the internet, and we use it far more than we even realize. As a true media studies student, I can’t pick out my favorite television show, for there are far too many! But I’ll focus on my top show at the moment—The Voice on NBC. I watch it because it brought many new twists to the standards of reality talent competitions, and humanizes the celebrity judges for the general public. It’s addictive, and keeps you coming back week after week to see which contestant will be sent home—and which is closer to wining the entire show.
ReplyDeleteWe pick up newspapers and magazines for the same reason we log into Facebook and Twitter—we need to constantly be in the know of all the new and continuous information we are bombarded with. For newspapers and magazines, it’s to keep up-to-date with domestic and global events, and for social media, let’s face it---it is imperative to our survival to know where our peers are at every minute of the day. I constantly think about quitting Facebook, because I will obviously be more efficient with my time, but the ultimate reason of what draws me back is the ultimate reason I use Facebook anyways—to keep in touch with my friends and family. But there are so many other reasons people use Facebook now—and at times it becomes quite ridiculous. The availability of this new media has brought widespread changes in what people do with media; digital file-sharing is the least of media’s problems now. Which brings me to the unintended negative consequences of media. According to John Dewey, “propaganda was a problem that should be solved through public education rather than censorship; if people could be taught to make better use of media content, they wouldn’t need to be sheltered from it.” (Baran and Davis 242) We now need to be educated about social media to make the best use of it possible. We are too vulnerable with all of our private information so readily available and accessible on the internet, but it’s doesn’t seem to be a widening concern amongst the majority of internet users. Media literacy, as we have discussed in class, needs to be an imperative aspect of growing up in media today—there are too many dependent and independent variables that come into play with social media that the average user cannot make justified and responsible decisions without have a prior knowledge on the unintended negative consequences that the internet can have on such an individual.
American Idol continues to be a popular show for the reason I love The Voice—the audience is able to pick their favorite contestant and go through the competition with them. The judges are used for a skilled and comedic feedback. American Idol is a perfect show to put on in the background, or to just watch once in a while—because there is no necessary prior information needed for each episode—just need to listen to the voices and make our own opinions. It’s also a great show to create family and social bonds.
I don’t think the ratings system is a good example to study the uses and gratifications of audiences, just because it’s too outdated to serve relevance for all the media outlets we have today. Also, it’s hard to determine a rating system at all, for the general public (who do not study the media as we do) cannot distinguish between their own uses and gratifications—so how are we supposed to distinguish it for them?
The text made a comment that “our personal uses of media are never unique to ourselves” (Baran & Davis, 242), meaning that media uses and gratifications can in fact be broadly categorized. However, the text goes on to define the theory, stating that “…people put specific media and specific media content to specific use in the hopes of having some specific need or set of needs gratified” (Baran & Davis, 242). If media uses and gratifications are indeed specific to the person, would this not make them unique to the individual? I am reminded of a time when I was confined to my home for a few years in which the television became my best friend. While I do not doubt that others could have the same issues or place the same importance on their chosen media, it is interesting that specificity in this instance does not equal uniqueness.
ReplyDeleteJen’s question about families consuming media together was also interesting. After years of babysitting and being part of a large family myself, I find that most families do not know what else to do besides watch television together. Media has become so ingrained in our society that it is normal to sit on a large sectional and watch a television program as family. It especially seems like a group activity because of the interactivity some shows offer – I’m thinking of voting on American Idol and cheering for your favorite celebrity on Dancing with the Stars.
Regarding media ratings systems, Nielsen is quick to acknowledge that there is always room for error when conducting measurements. There are several opportunities for these errors; for example, “the only person who knows when viewing occurs is the viewer. Viewing is not necessarily looking at a TV; it is not necessarily being in the room with a TV; it is something that only the viewer can define” (“What TV Ratings Really Mean”, 14). While they do provide a concrete statistic behind the abstract feelings individuals have about their favorite television program or magazine, they fail to accurately measure these feelings, which are essential towards establishing what the media uses and gratifications are. After all, if someone likes a program, he or she tends to stick around longer because they are invested in the story, regardless of what the show’s overall popularity is. The ratings systems offer only a number, which is the determining factor for most network executives when choosing whether or not to renew a television show for another season. So why was Everwood, a fantastic show in my mind, cancelled after four seasons? My media uses and gratifications were not considered in this situation, because the ratings took precedence. As such, it might be correct to say that the media uses and gratifications theory “exaggerates the amount of active use…” (Baran & Davis, 252), blurring the line between what media consumers truly enjoy and what is simply a passive activity.
I have a very strange relationship with television. It is the media outlet I use the least, in terms of having a show, or multiple shows, that I am dedicated to. Yet, it is the easiest outlet to find entertainment with. I can always find something, if I try hard enough, that will garner my attention when I'm bored or just want to relax. I feel like many people would agree with me. Thus, I think that a ratings system is extremely useful, but not all-encompassing to the uses and gratifications system. According to Blumler and Katz,"'perhaps the basic motivation for media use is just an unarticulated need for social contact'" (166). This is where, I believe, ratings systems come in. There are certain shows that claim the top rank of ratings systems because they feed into this human need for social contact. The two television shows that come to mind include 'American Idol' and 'Pretty Little Liars.' I am not a dedicated fan of either of these shows, but I know that they are immensely popular, especially since they trend on Twitter and Facebook. 'Idol' has been popular for years, as it changed competition reality shows; 'Pretty Little Liars' has gained a cult following because every one wants to know who 'A' is. Shows like these, that have received cult statuses, rely on the ratings systems, a strong presence on social media and dedicated fans. The social community involved with these shows is what makes them so popular with the ratings in general.
ReplyDeleteSince I am no a cult fan of any show, I found the Nielsen statistic that "When it comes to TV consumption, women of all ages
spend more time than their male counterparts" (1)to be intresting. This statistic proves that despite my lack of fandom when concerning television, I can easily flip through the channels and find something to enjoy. There is always a movie on HBO, a re-run of 'Sex and the City' or a reality show on housewives that I can watch without complaint. The "uses and gratifications" of television, for me, involve it being a passive activity.
We always look at professions such as nurses, teachers, etc. and think that they are the best jobs to have, because people will always need to be taken care of or educated. One of my favorite parts about the entertainment industry is that it too will also be around forever, as people will always want to be entertained. To me, working in television and film can almost be put on the same playing field as the occupations previously mentioned, because people will always have the desire to watch to television and be entertained by films. This brings us to the idea of the uses and gratifications theory discussed in the readings. Through Herzog’s early research, she found that we use media for “three major types of gratifications.” (Baron & Davis, 245) To begin, the first one is “merely a means of emotional release.” The “second and commonly recognized form of enjoyment concerns the opportunities for wishful thinking, and the third and commonly unsuspected form of gratification concerns the advice obtained from listening to daytime serials.”(Baron & Davis, 245) Although this research was completed in the 1940s, all of Herzog’s findings are still true today. We still consume media texts for emotional release and escapism, along with enjoyment, and seeking advice from programs such as Oprah and Dr. Phil. Even the dying Soap Operas can offer some therapy by including relatable, real life situations. The entertainment industry is here to stay, and our uses of it will seemingly remain the same as well.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to Jen’s well-put question dealing with the idea of being a true fan or casual viewers of texts, all in all, we are fans of the media that we frequently use. It may be a weird concept to think about, but if one enjoys and frequently uses Facebook over Twitter, then yes- they are a fan of Facebook. Some people may also be “fans” of more traditional media outlets such as newspapers, therefore, they read the paper so they physically have something in their hand, feel the texture of the newsprint, and see the traditional looking photographs and layouts. We still have expectations for all these other types of texts and outlets. Our expectations deal with whether or not our needs are met, similar to the movie genres that Jen mentioned. Did we get our news? Did we find friends on Facebook or get our favorite band’s tour info on Twitter? If one is logging onto Facebook ten times a day, or sits down every Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday night at 10pm for their favorite reality television show, they are not just a casual viewer. They are planning their schedules so they have time to watch and do what they enjoy; therefore, they are fans. Whether or not people admit to being a fan is another thing. Not many people are willing to admit that they are a diehard Real Housewives of Beverly Hills fan, or are obsessed with anything on VH-1. Many of these texts are seen as “guilty pleasures”, typically being used for escapism and entertainment. However, as mentioned before, not too many people will proudly stand up and say it.
I have a lot of issues when it comes to Nielsen ratings, as they really do not give a true representation of a true viewer. It would be interesting to see what the ratings would be like if they recorded how many households actually stayed on the same program for at least 20 to 30 minutes, as opposed to five. Although it may be hard to measure, “Nielsen does not provide qualitative evaluations of how much a program is “liked.” (What TV Ratings Really Mean, 2) In my eyes the idea of “why” is significant to measure when dealing with television programs. Therefore, to answer Jen’s final question, the Nielsen ratings are a poor example of audience uses and gratifications for television. They basically say it themselves. They only deal with quantitative data, such as how many people are watching and what demographics are watching. They do not deal with the qualitative aspect of why they are watching. In no way can the Nielsen ratings assist TV Executives in finding out why their show is not being watched- they are just the messenger who wants to be shot.
ReplyDeleteI would have to say that the Internet is the most influential source for Generation X. I personally use the internet for community purposes. Obviously I have friends that I hang out with now, but the Facebook and Twitter community is different. In a way I am establishing an identity through these sources. Whether I am uploading pictures, or tweeting, I am putting myself on the internet for others to view, and I choose how to represent myself in some manner. In turn I am not the only one, Baran and Davis states, “It’s important to remember that our personal uses of media are never unique to ourselves--thousands and often millions of other people engage in the same activities--often at the same time” (p. 242) Apparently other people are also using the internet to establish an identity. This can be seen when upon coming back to school from break, hundreds of photos of people on spring break, flooded my news feed, (myself included). In a way the people that choose to talk about spring break, and upload photos, are showing people that they like to have fun and there lives are interesting. Is this the gratification I get from Facebook and Twitter. Am I slightly following celebrities in trying to put my name out there? There is a notion that we use media to satisfy a need, however sometimes I find myself wondering why I like a show so much or why I am spending so much time looking at a persons Facebook profile. My favorite television show for instance is “Teen Mom”. My parents hate that my sister and I are interested in this show. Sure I could be watching Animal Planet, or the History Channel, but it is something about these out of wedlock babies, baby mamas, baby daddy's, and all the drama that follows, that really gets me going. I know it is trashy television, but I cannot help myself. Does this qualify me as an active audience when I watch this though? I don’t really talk about Teen Mom that often, however I do follow some of my favorite mom’s Twitters. However I feel there is something passive about watching this television show because I realize that it is trash, and I am shutting off my own life to sit and watch somebody else's on TV. However it is my choice to watch this show and continue watching this show. I have noticed that when I am with my friends, and they have chosen a television show that I am not interested in, I tune out, and look at my phone. Thus my expectation are not met in watching this show. Sometimes media is shoved in our faces without our choice or knowledge. Most of the time however, we use media to bond. Whether it is on the internet, talking about a book, television show, or movie.
ReplyDeleteBaran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
As an avid watcher of American Idol over the past decade, I think I can confidently ay that the way television viewing is measured is inaccurate. People watch reality shows, and American Idol in particular, for many different reasons. In any given season, there are those who watch casually; there are those who are invested in the competition, and then there are those who tune in simply to watch the outrageous auditions that have become synonymous with the beginning of each new season. These tiers are the different kinds of uses and gratifications that Baran and Davis discussed in this week's chapter, and they are the reasoning behind why we watch what we watch. (2)
ReplyDeleteIn terms of ratings, I think that if the Nielsen company found a more accurate system with which to determine what tier of voters are tuning in to their program, they would have more valuable information. Right now, the number Nielsen reports are simply a body count – there is no measurement of the investment of the viewer in the show they are watching, which is what’s really important. Casual viewers won’t be voting for contestants, or subsequently buying their records and going to their concerts. Yes, casual viewers might be converted to fans after watching a few episodes, but with reality competitions, the unchanging format and “plot line” make it unlikely. Nielsen should be more concerned with dedicated viewers, rather than those who will make a quick buck in high ratings for the network. It is the long-term viewers that are the most profitable ones, and Nielsen should find a way to single them out, and have those be the ratings they report. That way, shows could get accurate ratings and networks could know who is watching what show, and know what to invest in.
1) What TV Ratings Really Mean. Nielsen, 2007. Print.
2) Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Every individual starts off as a casual viewer when it comes to using Facebook, watching a sitcom on television, or reading a newspaper. An individual may get started using Facebook because all of their friends are. Or someone may start watching a sitcom because the title of the show is appealing to them. It is when someone repeatedly keeps using Facebook or continues to watch a sitcom that they become a fan. But to answer your question I don’t think a person continuously watches the same show because they are casually viewing it week to week. If I watch a show I do not like I might give it another chance and watch one more episode, but I’m not going to continuously keep on watching it if it doesn’t appeal to me. For me to continuously keep watching a show, I need to genuinely like it. Wilbur Schramm argues that “we all make decisions about which content we choose based on our expectations of having some need met” (Baran, 246). Obviously that need can vary from person to person. Someone might turn on the television just for the simple reason of having something on in the background, or some might watch the news just to keep up to date what is going on around them. But my opinion is that the majority of people watch a program on television or use a social networking site because it fulfills their expectations, and they have become fans of that particular form of media.
ReplyDeleteI think American Idol is an example of a show that has fulfilled its audience’s expectations. Maybe in the first or second season of the show people watched just for the heck of it or watched just to see what the show was about. But now the show has been around for many years and has an established fan base. I doubt that many people who are watching American Idol this season are watching it for the first time. I’m sure there are a number of reasons why so many people tune into American Idol and make it the top rated show, and many of the reasons are probably the ones you listed in your blog. But it would be impossible for me to pinpoint one specific reason why so many people tune into American Idol on a weekly basis.
As for rating systems, I do not think they are a good example of studying uses and gratifications of audiences. But that really isn’t the purpose of rating systems such as Nielson. “There are two questions the Nielsen ratings answer about TV viewing: “Who is watching TV?” and “What are they watching?” (What TV Ratings Really Mean, 2). Rating systems are used to tell us which are the most popular shows being viewed on television, not why they are the most popular.
Jen, using American Idol as an example, you listed several questions wondering what aspects about the show develops a fan base. The way to answer those questions is to study the relationship between functionalism and the uses and gratifications of the public. American Idol would be classified as the entertainment media function (Baran & Davis, 248), intending for the audience to watch the show for pleasure but it does not pinpoint the show’s attributes that have people watching week by week. The marketers have heavily promoted the cold-hearted Simon Cowell and amateur singers but those are not the only reasons why many are attracted to the show.
ReplyDeleteStudying the active and passive retention of those exposed to American Idol helps us better understand why viewers watch the show. The active audience is much easier to quantify feelings toward the show because the viewers knowingly go out of their way to make there fanhood apparent. Viewer reactions can be accumulated and studied through fan’s email, social media, and the Nieslen reports. I believe identifying the passive audience and how they are exposed to American Idol, and media in general, is very difficult solve. Passive audiences make up a substantial portion of media consumers, so figuring out how to assemble content that reaches them is vital for the success of media organizations.
The Nieslen report is a very effective system in place to measure how much certain programs are watched but I do feel that the system could be improved. One issue is the sample population size they use. Ten-thousand is not nearly a large enough sample size to rate the Television viewing habits of Americans. It absolutely gives a fairly accurate representation but I feel if they installed the Nieslen Technology into cable boxes or television consoles before they are distributed to the people, a much larger and more accurate sample could be tested. Another advantage of implementing this improved system is that the Television viewers would not be constantly aware that their viewing habits are being monitored. One has to think that by essentially logging in a password before watching television may trigger you to change your show routine. One aspect of the Nieslen system I believe is brilliant is the people meter. According to the Nieslen frequently asked questions booklet, this meter collects information about the specific people watching the television set and transmits the data each night. The people meter does not define what the viewer wants to watch but it gives a better depiction of the demographics watching each of the programs.
Overall, trying to find out answers to why we gravitate toward a certain medium and programs such as American Idol is still unknown. Analyzing people’s attraction to media and programming still needs much research to be done in order to be fully knowledgeable. Great strides have been made however, understanding the uses and gratifications theory and functionalization. The Nieslen technology is advanced but Jen made a great point earlier, “All of these questions cannot be answered through the Nielsen ratings.” Perhaps the next big advertising tool should quantify what aspects of media programming lure individuals.
I have never really thought about my favorite media source but I would have to say it is between the internet and television. These are the two biggest in which I get my information from. Trying to pick my favorite TV show is like trying to decide what my favorite kind of food is, it can’t really be done because I have a lot of show that I favor. I would however be able to say that my two favorite networks are ESPN and SPEED. ESPN is just a network that most guys are going to go straight to when they turn the TV on to check the latest in sports updates. I like it because it covers a good majority of sport, although some sports don’t get enough coverage. I like the SPEED network because ive grown up around cars my entire life so watching the building shows or club racing/ formula one racing is just natural for me. Now when I turn on the TV to these channels I expect to see certain shows covering the new hottest topic. Its just something that we have grown accustom to but when we are thrown off that expectation track so to say, us as an audience are irritated. We may not watch that channel for a little while thus lowering its ratings, but what are ratings really. In the article What TV Ratings Really Mean it states “The ratings numbers that you may read about in the newspaper are the “average audience rating,” or the percent of television viewers tuned to a particular program during the average minute.” So in term it is saying they average the number of people that turn on a channel for an estimated minute. I find a flaw in this because you could be flicking through channels and get up to go get food or go to the bathroom and a random channel could be on. You’re not watching that channel but still it is being calculated because it is on your TV for longer than a minute. Many of the times for me I find the channel I watch to watch then get up and go because I want what interests me on the TV when I come back. “Methodologically speaking, many of the goals of mass media use can be derived from data supplied by individual audience members themselves – that is, people are sufficiently self-aware to be able to report their interests and motives in particular cases, or at least to recognize them when confronted with them in an intelligible and familiar verbal formulation.” (Blumer, Gurevitch, & Katz 165). We as human go to the places where we like what we hear, read, or see. We know when something is well written or looks nice its part of our nature so when we come across a good newspaper article or TV shows it sticks. It is then something that people talk about for day after not just because of the event but because of the word choices or pictures and the emotions it brings up that individuals are able to sympathize with. So what it comes down to is an individual’s interest and ability to pick our something that is well written or produced and follow it.
ReplyDeleteI think it’s safe to say that rating systems like Nielsen can’t accurately depict why consumers of different media, television in particular, consume the media that they consume. Like Jen stated in her blog, nobody knows why a TV is tuned into a certain show or network, and nobody knows why people watch the shows they watch. An audience member’s uses and gratifications for a particular media source differ based on what they’re looking to get from that particular outlet. When discussing the Nielsen rating system, the media outlet at hand is TV, and the thousands of shows that are aired every day.
ReplyDelete“Television audience measurement is a service of The Nielsen Company”, according to the article titled What TV Ratings Really Mean by the Nielsen Company. The article states that Nielsen measures the number of audience members, but not the reasons why these audience members are tuned in. The show American Idol was discussed in the blog and how it had the most viewers for the week of March 5-11 according to Nielsen with over Eighteen and a half million viewers. Nielsen doesn’t know why this many people were tuned in to the show, but they know that they were in fact tuned in. An audience member’s uses and gratifications for a particular show are present in their own mind, even though it may not be apparent to anyone around them. That many people may have been tuned into American Idol for that week simply because they’re fans of the show, fans of the judges, or fans of a particular contestant. Or perhaps they’re not a fan at all; perhaps their TV just happened to be tuned into Fox during the show but they couldn’t care less about American Idol or any of its contestants. Maybe there are viewers that were tuned in so they could laugh at something during that time, or maybe they were watching the show on Fox that aired before American Idol and they just haven’t gotten around to changing the channel. There are countless reasons as to why almost nineteen million people were tuned into Fox for American Idol that week, but only the audience members themselves are aware of their uses and gratifications for the show.
“Why do we use media the way we do? What are we seeking from media, and are we getting what we want? Do media easily satisfy us, or do we constantly change our uses in search of something more?” (Baran and Davis 241) According to this section from Baran and Davis’s Mass Communication Theory, The authors are asking the reader why we consume the media that we consume, and do our reasons provide “gratification?” The authors go on to discuss different forms of media, and how there is so much media at our fingertips today that allow us to kill time. Facebook is discussed, Twitter is mentioned, and texting is even a part of a daily routine regarding media. When thinking about these other forms of media and how they can almost be considered “time killers”, can the same theory be applied to television? Is it possible that more than eighteen million people were tuned into American Idol during the week of March 5th because they needed something to keep them occupied, or because they really wanted to see who made it to the next round of the show? Like stated earlier, there’s really no way to tell, but thanks to companies like Nielsen, we know that 18.69 million people were tuned in for one reason or another.
I have to admit I have a facebook problem. Its not the fact that everyone is on facebook, or that is just what you do between classes or when the lecture is incredibly boring. It is a way to connect. My uses and gratifications, which is a topic discussed by Baran and Davis which they describe as “approach to media study focusing on the uses to which people put media and the gratifications they seek from those uses” (Baran, Davis 245). Well my favorite media source is probably social media. My uses of social media are for connecting with those people who I do not get to see every day. I use it to have a way to see what all my friends from different states; countries and schools are up to. My gratifications would be the ease of comment on their facebook page, when you do not get the chance to get together and talk. I have watched many television shows and films over my lifetime. I love television shows with action, drama, comedy and romance. The shows that fulfill all the things I am not able to do on a daily basis. I love the superhero shows like Smallville give me the ability to connect with a hero. My gratifications are that I can watch McDreamy do an incredible surgery, one thing I will never get to do, and save a life. I love watching One Tree Hill to go through the motions and deal with the hard issues that we face in life. We watch television and films that help us deal with our deeper issues that we are too afraid to face. We want to know that we are not alone, that the problems we face are not singularly our problems, that others have faced them too.
ReplyDeleteWell don’t even get me started with American Idol. I used to watch the beginning of the show just because I liked to see the funny auditions. But I also liked to see the good singers too. I do not like the whole sign and get voted off process, for me its not that interesting, but I love seeing what the judges say. I miss that Simon is no longer on the show because that man was hilarious. We, as Americans like to see people fail because we know that failure isn’t something that only happens to us. Its just like how we like to watch America’s funniest home videos and wipeout not because we are sadistic and like to watch people hurt, but because we like to see other people feeling embarrassed. We like to have the focus off of our own lives for once. “patterns of media use are shaped by more or less definite expectations of what certain kinds of content have to offer the audience member” (Blumer, Gurevitch, & Katz 164). What the shows I watch offer me is a sense of belonging.
Television is not rated the way I think it should be. Ratings are based on how many people watch the show the minute it airs. But how many of us actually watch the show in that time spot and on that day? Well I know I don’t. Most of us watch television either online, legally or illegally, on dvr, network sites, or sites such as hulu, Netflix and sidereel. If shows received their ratings from online sources as well, then the top shows may be different than those that currently top the charts. The problem with our television and film watching today is that we do not actually give credit to those who deserve it. We do not buy the music, go to the movies or watch the show the way we used to. We download illegally, stream illegally, tape movies with a camera and post it online. This is a problem that needs to be fixed, but I think that is an argument for another time.
I can completely relate to Sarah’s response in regards to uses and gratifications of television and the media. I have what most would consider a casual relationship with this area of the media. Not for a lack of interest, but more due to the restraints my schedule puts on my television consumption. I rarely follow multiple shows consistently, but I am entertained by the content of television programming at my leisure and convenience. However, I think my personal gratification becomes slightly more complicated with the intertwining of the Internet and television programming available. In this sort of context, I think the rating system is useful to gauge the frequency of programs being watched, but I am unaware of its ability to capture the amount of viewers in other venues, like Hulu and Internet platforms. Therefore, as Sarah put, it is not “all-encompassing.” Baran and Davis stated, “our personal uses of media are never unique to ourselves” (242). Which leads me to think that while the rating system is flawed, that it is necessary for media professionals. It’s the most realistic approach to answer their questions about the programming. The rating system provides them with the statistical data to understand whether their audience is having their needs gratified. It is possible that we may see a shift in the rating system; an altering that allows professionals to quantify information that comes from more than just the initial broadcasting of a particular program. With the Internet become increasingly popular for media content and viewing of such, it’s necessary to start contemplating. However, for now, we can cope with the rating system. For the time being, it serves its purpose. It shows that America loves certain shows, and those templates of programming will continue to penetrate television programming until we can prove people are no longer fulfilling their needs through them.
ReplyDelete