Boddy RQ’s

1. In  chapters 6/10, Boddy contemplate to disparate extents how previous attempts to merge the internet and the television “into one” were unsuccessful, including Microsoft/ WebTV. Included in chapter 6 are comments made both by Steve Jobs, who contends that people watch television not to think whereas people use the computer to “turn their minds on,” (cited pg. 90) and Bill Gates, who argued that a “big-screen” television, unlike a PC, doesn’t “afford privacy” (cited pg. 91). In other words, television is constructed as a passive experience shared with others (family) set in direct opposition to the interactive and private experience of the computer/internet. Yet, in 2010 new television sets are literally (and almost exclusively) computer monitors,  playstation 3 is literally a computer necessarily used through a television, and people play online video/TV content for others to view together on TV screens. To what extent have these recent developments forced a reconsideration of the merger of the internet and TV, and reconfigured the passive/shared VS. interactive/solitary binaries that made the television and internet irreconcilably different mediums for different experiences ten plus years ago?
2. In chapter 8, Boddy shows how the decision of CBS’s news division to use virtual advertising to alter the billboards standing outside CBS studios in New York City led people to question the legitimacy of its journalistic standards. The question of legitimacy goes farther than that, however. Television was once thought of a “window” into worlds unknown for viewers, but how did CBS threaten the legitimacy of that window when it fictionalized the “view” of NYC for viewers? Moreover, an original episode of a fictional show comes out of a distinct historical context, and is encoded with specific meanings and an intended experience for viewers.  How does using VA to change the products used by characters in the story-worlds in syndicated programs, perhaps from “older” brands/logos to “newer” ones, raise questions about the legitimacy of the resulting meaning and experience of the text? Or do the meanings/experience of a text no longer matter when it is outdated and in re-runs? Finally, “liveness” in televised sports/news has been culturally viewed as synonymous with the real, the legitimate. How does the altering of billboards, within a live broadcast of a sporting event from one country airing in another, to make them location-specific to that other country-aka constructing a false but apparently real “diegesis” of the game- raise questions about the legitimacy of the live footage?


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s