This is even more evidence for the previous claims in this. It dips into philosophical reasoning for why things are certain things. the football does not have purpose or meaning until you put it in the context of a football game and on a football field. We give things meanings to support our world view.

I think this is why it would be impossible to satisfy everyone when it comes to representation, because everyone has different lens's and different meanings of everything. Life is not an objective path, everyones is different and everyone will see a certain thing a different way.

I agree with this claim, there will never be a final and correct way on who, how or what to represent in the media. You will never be able to truly represent everyone as they wish.

I think that this is a very interesting take on the notion of representation. A lot of people fight for representation in the media but what does it amount to really? Is it all an act done by major studios to give the illusion of progress? Would companies do it on their own if they had no social pressure to make changes?

I like this introduction, it describes what is going to be talked about without taking a direct stance upfront. It acknowledges that there is a topic that is going to be discussed but it is so broad and vague that it needs to be broken down fully before an idea or stance could be taken.

It is interesting to me where they draw the line because a lot of this stuff is classified information. Even the people who are employed as crime scene investigators are not allowed to discuss what they did at work with their loved ones,

I would say that this is not only true for shows In this genre but also medical shows, there is more of an emphasis on what the instruments represent than if they are used in a practical sense in the show.

This is a good sentiment to push when making a show about this type of profession, they might not always get it right as there are an insane amount of variables in this field but at the end of the day everyone on the team is human and is capable of making mistakes.

Of course this is also true because a true forensics/police show would include a lot of paperwork and lab work hat might not be as entertaining as the on scene stuff, at its core this is a show and its purpose is to entertain.

I think that this works because it's something sort of taboo. Not a lot of people have or will experience being inside a crime scene, it draws out that morbid curiosity that's built into every person.

DVD was apart of the cycle that is outdated technology, streaming right now is king of television broadcasting. And one day if a more mainstream or convenient way to stream shows is found then that will become the standard. DVD made reruns basically useless because why would you need reruns when you can just pop the DVD in and watch the show that you want to whenever you want.

This is true, the ability to start stop and rewind/ rewatch movies and shows whenever you want was a new feature that has been brought to T.V via the DVD model. It allows the viewer to be more in control and engage with the content however they want

This was basically bottling the idea of the flow theory captured in a DVD so you can rewatch it whenever you want.

The DVD model is becoming more and more outdated by the day but its principles still remain the same. Replay ability was why DVD blew up in the first place and also its applicability to this model.

This is a perfect example of my last two annotations, the character has a main plot point but each week faces a new set of trivial new issues. In the end the main plot point is fixed but the episodes leading up to the culmination of the show does nothing to the actual purpose of the show.

Once again, how shows that used to air weekly work. They may give the illusion of providing a solution but it is a flimsy or weak one that can easily be broken and replaced with a new conflict for the characters to solve and the viewer to digest. It is a very easy way to get as many stories into the show as possible.

That's how shows like sitcoms or 90's shows that would air every week would work. The cast of characters would have to face a new issue weekly that would get "solved" but would be right back the next week with a different issue.

And I believe that this will be true and long as watchable media is still viable. People will always crave more and the "Impluse to go on watching" will always live in humans as it is their nature. The construction of the flow theory in television is not only true in media but in all of life. Humans are constantly questioning and wanting answers which is why this model works so well.

I don't think that there is an ideological metaphor for the power of television. I think that any media consumption on a screen is very powerful, especially in the modern age we have seen it tear families and people apart.

I think that this statement is very important because now that we have recognized that it is a problem what are we doing to solve it? the answer is nothing. Content just keeps getting easier and shorter to consume and people keep consuming it

I think that this statement can now be applied with a modern lens and can speak to peoples current attention spans. Apps like Tik Tok and instagram have implemented ways of consuming hundreds of different types of content within just a few minutes of being on the app. I Truly Believe that cable television was the last time humans had a attention span that made it so they could sit through a whole broadcast on T.V

For some people, this unpredictable style of t.v has been something that people are fond of and keep coming back too. Fans of a series often try to search for and uncover outages from the show just because they crave more of that unpredictability that a certain show has. A stellar example of this would be the Comedy "The Office".

This is another important part about movies and T.V genres. Books kind of exist independently of the social political climate whenever you are reading the book. Movies and shows often comment or reflect the time that they were made in or are suppose to represent. So people unconsciously take their personal views and watch the movie through their personal lens.

A lot of movies success does rely on its ability to relate to the current times. Often times movies will make jokes that will make sense in the current climate or at the time of their release. The same goes for genre, if a certain genre or style of movie/show is popular at the time you will see a lot of movies with the same sort of theme. An example of this would be the explosion of marvel super hero movies in the 2010's

I have taken a literary English class and I can draw comparisons between literary criticism and television criticism. Mainly on story progression because the way the stories are portrayed are very different.

This is still true to this day, think of any car commercial you've ever seen, there's always a happy family going to their kids soccer practice or something

This statement makes sense, imagine how hard it would've been to come back from a war and the whole dynamic of family and society is different due to new technology

so it was seen kind of as a status thing?

This is the double edge sword of T.V you can apply it to amplify your life but also it can cause loneliness and drive a wedge in your social life.

This is something that is still debated today, how tv and media affects families and relationships