‘Unreading’ Contemporary Television

Television and Video: Reconfigurations of Audiovisual Communication

“…Discussions on old and new definitions of television have been abundant in the past decades, mainly due to its constant reconfiguration. At the beginning of the 2010s, researchers considered television as a medium out of control (Schwaab, 2013) and the socio-technological apparatus it was then installing was that of a centripetal screen (Lopes et al, 2012). In other words, it was showing an ability to grab and concentrate resources of all kinds, be it textual, visual and semiotic, institutional or technological to retain its centric status not only in the ordinary living-room of ordinary people but mainly as a longstanding stronghold of societal experience.…”

EHSSA-22 & BLTST-22 May 25-27, 2022 Barcelona (Spain)

“…Reference [7] indicates three different stages when it refers to the transformations that have occurred during the evolution of television: TV I or the creator of consensus narratives, TV II defined by a competitive broadcast programming and TV III that focuses on the satisfaction of consumer demands for personalized content aiming to please segmented audiences. In fact, if at an early stage (1950-1980s) the television offer was not very diversified and the context of viewing was mainly familiar, over the following years, with the emergence of satellite TV and cable TV and with the increasing competitiveness between the different channels and media, the offer grew significantly and the increase in the number of television sets per home helped families move from the living room to the other rooms of the house.…”

“…Because of these studies, concepts like network and multichannel environment [21], broadcasting and narrowcasting [22], shortage and abundance [23], mass medium and individualistic medium [24], analog and digital [25], nationalistic orientation versus globalizing orientation [26], programmer offer and on-demand option [27] or immersion mutation [28] have become familiar and recurrent. For reference [29] "television is still ordinary in many ways, it still gives meaning to the casual viewer of the TV I age, it still provides material for the imagination of the avid fan of the TV II age, and even the most mature quality television series of the TV III age should be read as an object embedded in television culture and its viewer should be regarded as being part of an audience".…”

“…For reference [33] these audiovisual serial productions are "cultural phenomena of the utmost importance". For reference [35] "television series are both relevant and complex and address and unite a wide audience". When reference [36] refers to the style and content found in high quality series, what is emphasized is "a decidedly cinematic visual style, hybridity of structure, a rich and complex character-based narrative, a generally liberalist humanist outlook, the engagement of controversial and/or social issues, and a degree of textual self-reflexivity".…”

“…According to reference [42] the future of television will be customeroriented and will offer interactive content experiences. Therefore, reference [43] believes that the current situation in which television finds itself can be seen either as a crisis or as a moment of change that is precisely the opposite -a chance for television to reinvent itself.…”