#i pride myself on my realism as much as is within my means of capturing it. | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

jillskoba · 5 years

Text

Audience Studies (3P18) Blog Post #2

On a dreary Wednesday morning I arrived into Toronto by way of GO train, having spent the last hour driving through moderate traffic on the QEW. I was tired, but still rather excited that day, as I was invited to participate in a live taping of the CTV show The Launch at the CBC. I was not familiar with the series prior to the invitation but found it a great opportunity to look behind the scenes of a professional television production (not to mention an audience experience worth writing about). Through the hustle and bustle of Union Station, I made my way on foot to the CBC with ten minutes to spare. Signing in at the VIP entrance as instructed in my email, I joined the smaller of two lines had been formed earlier, populated mostly by school students from local colleges and high schools (as well as Derek Foster, a familiar face), and eventually we were led to a large red elevator that brought us to the tenth floor. From there we checked our coats and waited in line again, until we were prompted to follow a member of staff who led us through the rather short tour of the main studio and recording area used for The Launch. The main staging area was much smaller than I would have expected for a music competition, but it was explained to us that through the ‘magic of television’ the space would appear much larger on screen. It was a wonderful opportunity to see a television studio in person, as glancing overhead revealed a maze of numbered plugs and light fixtures, individually numbered in the hundreds. We were told that the main studio operated at least six hundred lights for the one production, excluding the set up for the recording area.

After the tour was concluded, we waited again outside of the studio, before being brought in with the rest of the audience members. I was uneasy as I learned we were expected to stand for the duration of the taping, as being flat-footed meant that standing for extended periods of time would cause discomfort and eventual back pain. What surprised me however was that while I had expected to see a much younger audience, the studio was soon populated with many individuals in their more senior years, many of which shared the same unease about standing for so long. Upon our return to the main studio to prepare for filming, several of us were able to request chairs to sit for a good portion of the event. The audience had been segregated into several sections: the general audience stood circled around the stage, with those having requested seating closest to the entrance. Opposite of us was another seating area, reserved for the family of the episode’s performers, and segregated by height was the “I Heart Radio” lounge that the mentors / judges were to be seated for the performances. It took some time before the proceedings finally began, a good half hour after the supposed start time for the taping. We were greeted by the host of the show, as well as another individual who I believe was one of the producers (I cannot recall his name), as he was involved in directing the recording of the events that followed. The entire process of filming the live show took about three hours, between multiple filmed and non-filmed performances, numerous discussions between the judges / mentors, and the several reactionary crowd responses that required recording.

There were a few interesting points that I learned as things eventually went underway. First, the events of the show are taped out of sequence, with the crowd’s reactionary applause to the performances recorded first. The performance of both contestants was also recorded a total of three different times, with each run focusing on capturing different camera angles, and the crowd instructed again to cheer or withhold at the beginning. The control over audience applause is not an unfamiliar tactic to me however, as I had previously attended a local taping of the CBC program “The Debaters”, and as applause and audience reaction is key to both comedy and competition shows, it made a lot of sense. However, the resulting applause in both scenarios was genuine in its affection. Something else I observed while part of the studio audience was the overall level of affection that the crowd held when the different performers and mentors were presented. While each guest received a favourable reaction from the audience, the appearance of Jann Arden (the season’s celebrity mentor) garnered an eruption of applause from almost everyone in attendance. The last thing I had learned toward the end was that the winner was not selected during the live taping. The discussion between the three mentors was captured after each performance, but no formal announcement was ever made. This could have been in part to ensure that the audience in attendance could not spoil the finale of this competition, and to encourage them to watch the airing when the new season is released.

The role of mass media, as theorized by Dallas W. Smythe (Sullivan, 2013) was that rather than being only part of the larger ideological apparatus of capitalism, it was part of the overlying economic system as well (p. 81). By providing the loyal audience with something to entertain (the media content itself), the attention of the audience itself could become a commodity that could be bought and sold. While the attention of the live audience is not being captured as a commodity in this scenario, the presence of the two-way system is still present. By providing the audience with entertainment (in the form of active participation in production), the audience not only assists in the production of media content but become delayed consumers as well. Individuals attending a live show taping are likely to watch the episode if they believe they will see themselves on it, and encourage those they know to watch as well, as a form of boast or moment of pride. The time spent watching the program becomes commodified for broadcasters to sell to advertisers in the form of blocks of commercial space during program breaks, and with the increase in viewership and attention gained by using the participants, the viewership for those product placements theoretically increases. However, Canadian-based media products have notable difficulty in competing against their larger American counterparts, as the industry surrounding media production in the United States easily dwarves the Canadian media industry. The strain between a limited audience (in the form of a smaller population) and cross-border competition places Canadian products like The Launch under stress to maximize profitability. In the case of this reality music competition, The Launch reaches out to its own consumers for support, and to help assist in constructing a home-grown audience by focusing on local Canadian talent, rather than the more global outreach that American broadcasts can extend to. It is in this more direct relationship between audiences and content producers that shows such as The Launch can find success in its niche.

While there is a nearly endless array of options when choosing media products to interact with, there is almost always an underlying factor in an individual’s decision-making process. With the traditional uses and gratifications approach, Sullivan (2013) states that the emphasis should be placed on “how and why individuals use the media rather than considering the ways in which they are acted upon by outside forces” (p. 108). However, it is Sundar and Lumperos (2013) who specify that the technological features of the media consumed are of little impact to a user’s gratification (p. 506). While a reality television show may be portrayed as realistic, the world that structures it is entirely fabricated, as it is a production of what is an often a for-profit media company. Initially I questioned why then there would still be an attraction to participate in a reality show that, from the audience’s perspective, is far from real. What I hypothesize is that in the case of The Launch and other shows like it, the pleasure for reality does not come from the portrayal of realism within the fabricated television world, but rather the emotional connection drawn between the audience and the competitors. Reality television promises an idea that anyone can be a participant, that those on screen are just like those watching from home. Within the live sphere, this connection is only strengthened as what was once an image on a screen is now in the flesh, with audiences forming a stronger association with the portrayed reality. My theory is further supported by witnessing the question and answer segment that the mentors held with the crowd after the completion of the taping. From within the live audience were quite a few people, whom I had heard among one another and expressing to the mentors their interest in auditioning for the next season. What those audience members had witnessed was a portrayal of their own dreams live and right before them, transcending the medium of television and making reality seem more real.

It is important to remember that expectations of an audience are hard to theorize without knowing the dominant mode of reception used. This was especially true in my case, as I do not consider myself a normal consumer of reality television media in any way. Instead I often avoid such programming like the plague, as I find little entertainment in their attempts to portray a heavily artificial reality as “real”. It is likely that I engaged with the audience experience in a mediated mode, recognizing the “text as a media production” (Michelle, 2007, p. 203) by focusing on the constructed nature of the program rather than the intended message. This interpretation of the events before me pulled my focus from the story that was being told, and instead paying more attention to the means of production, including the lighting setup, the multiple types of cameras used throughout the filming process, and the order in which events were filmed. While my attention was elsewhere, the remainder of the audience would have engaged with the production as transparent, the perception of “text as life” (Michelle, 2007, p. 195) and allowing themselves to be absorbed by the events. Michelle (2007) notes that in the case of nonfiction programs like reality programming, the consumer assumes that the depicted events and persons are reflective of the real world, which relies on the acceptance of its reflection by most of the audience (p. 196). As mentioned earlier, there is a distinct likelihood that the audience makes use of the experience to imagine themselves in the shoes of the competitors and become a famous musician. Through this perceived fantasy, audience members are willing to accept the reflection of reality that the program provides, even when it exists simultaneously their own lives.

While the production of The Launch does not make me any more likely to go out and begin watching reality television, it does give me a bit of newfound respect for the work and effort that goes into a production of its kind. The out of sequence recordings remind me of the basics techniques of creating film, in which recorded images are woven together to create a sense of space and time on screen, in an order that without context may seem entirely arbitrary. The decision to record performances three times still seems excessive to me, though given the size of the studio and the amount of space required to maneuver, it adds to the impressive nature of the production. The recording of duplicate performances for example is done to obtain footage at different angles, requiring more work with a greater effect. The resulting footage will eventually be spliced together to create a series of shots that will flow in a visually pleasing way. All of this effort is done by the production company without the conscious recognition by the viewer of the amount of effort required to capture every angle or ensure the sound and image from three separate performances are synced seamlessly. Overall the experience was another great addition to the experience of observing audiences. Though I found myself unable to identify with the audience I was a part of (realizing as well how little taste in music I really have), it required me to reflect on topics from the last few weeks to gain deeper insight into how audiences engage with texts and media.

References

Michelle, C. (2007). Modes of Reception: A Consolidated Analytical Framework. Communication Review, 10(3), 181–222. https://doi.org.proxy.library.brocku.ca/10.1080/10714420701528057

Sullivan, J. L. (2013). Media audiences: Effects, users, institutions, and power. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sundar, S., & Limperos, A. (2013). Uses and grats 2.0: New gratifications for new media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57(4), 504-25.

#communication #audience

0 notes