Genres are not simply artistic categories, but rather reflections of culture and current times. It fits into the analogy of language and how it fits in as a specific utterance in the much larger scheme of grammar, it allows a view into how it can be one thing but represent so much more.

Genres ensure a a balance of similarity and variation. They work hand in hand with the economics side of things to allow driving change while maintaining recognizability. Without change things get stagnant, but without similarity interest wains. The genres of TV and Film are a calculated formula to drive revenue growth.

Genres serve as a formula of entertainment and economics. It balances both efficiency and predictability with novelty and perception. A genre allows for familiarity to be side by side with variations to maintain a cohesive understanding of what oneself is seeing or looking at. This works to shift the view of a genre from a collection of aesthetic decisions to an understanding of how they are utilized within a capitalist economy.

There is a distinct difference between the overarching and timeless literary genres such as comedy and tragedy and the genres of media such as sitcoms and and screwball comedies. Television genres are created in the moment and to respond to public wants and feedback where as literary genres are fixed and survive as abstract categories without change overtime. Media as a whole requires more flexibility in how genres are created and defined.

Genre is not just an individual description. Instead, it leans towards categorization like in the biological sciences. Genres in essence are created due to the human need for perceived order, as a whole, humans look to create order and framework based on perceived similarities and differences. With this, divisions are artificial conceptions and not defined facts.

Hindsight is 20-20, TV currently serves as background noise and distraction in a variety of situations. Beyond this, early observers of TV also noted eyestrain and domestic disruption due to the need for a direct line of sight in viewing the works being broadcast. Early adoption was slow and cost prohibitive, signaling fears of failure before other broadcast techniques were developed and utilized for rapid adoption of the technology through commercial viability.

This dispute was harmful to the general public. Delaying a better service and experience in the name of profits and attempting to mitigate market share loss to a competitor with better technology.

Radio giants began to steer early TV. A combination of manufacturing, patents, and broadcasting were already in effect and passed scrutiny. This allowed for additional advertising that was targeted at an existing customer basis and more or less served what they wanted to see.

US policy was aimed at public service, despite this, effective property rights were given to public air ways. Due to minimal amount of oversight and limited channels, network giants formed and captured a disproportionate amount of revenue.

Early on, FCC choices forced the dependence on certain paths such as VHF allocation and monochrome standards. As capital was invested in these, is became much harder to upgrade resolution and color due the both the politics surrounding it as well as the finances involved. Consequently, due to these decisions, an inferior image and color allowance shaped the American public's relationship with TV.