Tuesday, June 12, 2012

AMC Original Programming - General Critique

Just an observation in the words of an incomparable philosopher and cultural critic:

"White, white, white, white,white, white, white,white, white, white, white, white!" - Kat Williams

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Sexual Orientation - Cultural Parameter Report


(from "Cultural Bias and Prime Time Telelvision", Pg.175)

Sexual Orientation 

 1) The only remarkable presence of anyone in the LGBT community was in Will 
& Grace, which marked homosexuals, particularly gay men as a foil for ridicule and 
hyper-sexualization without giving them the respect of portrayals that showed true loving 
relationships, physical or emotional, implicit or explicit. 

The absence of portrayals of the LGBT community was troubling, but not 
surprising given the supporting research available on the invisibility of this population in 
prime time television.  Hall reported, though, on one prime time program that regularly 
raises LGBT issues in its narratives - The Simpsons, one of the longest-running prime 
time animated programs in history.  Hall asserted that The Simpsons, with its unique style 
in thumbing its nose at the status quo, brought LGBT issues into the living rooms of the 
United States of America through a number of characters and narratives, including one of 
the lead characters, Homer Simpson.  Hall claimed that Homer questioned our delineation 
of what and who is homosexual or heterosexual as Homer reportedly was “‘flattered and 
intrigued’ when he thinks his ancient and shriveled boss, Mr. Burns is making a pass at 
him...kisses his secretary Carl (voice of Harvey Fierstein) on the lips” (Hall, 1997, ¶ 12) 
and “who sighs breathlessly one day ‘Ah, Oliver North, he was just poured into that 
uniform’” (ibid).  None of the programs in this study were as brave or creative.  On the 
contrary, That 70’s Show almost ruthlessly upheld the banner of macho, heterosexism at 
every turn, punctuated by Red, frustrated, exclaiming to Fez with disdain, “You are one 
fruity kid” (Program Sample 02/#6). 

Jones, in an interview with Stephen Tropiano, author of The Prime Time Closet: 
A History of Gays and Lesbians on TV, said, “A few seasons ago you couldn’t swing a  
small yappy dog without hitting a regular or recurring gay character” (2002, ¶ 1).  The 
situation had changed drastically by the time the 2002-2003 season previews were ready 
for review.  The networks made decisions to maximize their embrace of the middle-(U.S. 
of)American suburbia in its new shows, creating “a universe that writers and producers 
aren’t so quick to put gay characters into” (Jones, 2002, ¶ 3).  Tropiano claimed, “it all 
comes down to economics.  They’re trying to boost their ratings and make money” (as 
cited in Jones, 2002, ¶ 5).  The bottom line remained that corporate conglomerates were 
making decisions that continued to segregate and balkanize audiences and prevented the 
cross-cultural, cross-sub-cultural content and meaning presentation and exchange that 
marked times of better patterns of diversity in television programming.  There were scant 
and negative portrayals of the LGBT community and its needs, realities and issues in 
prime time programming for aspirational teenage viewers to learn from or, at the very 
least, to become tolerant of. 

 An article published online by the American Family Association pointed out a 
troubling perspective on the reality of the LGBT community on television with worse 
implicit outcomes for the LGBT community in society.  Sharp, AFA Special Projects 
Director wrote that “prime-time television controls the moral climate of our nation” 
(n.d.).  Sharp went on to say the following: 
“In 1985, when gay characters in prime-time television were infrequent, only 40% of Americans felt comfortable around homosexuals. Today, that figure has risen to 60% and by all indications, Hollywood wants those numbers to increase. The most influential market for promoting the homosexual agenda is clearlytelevision. Between 1989 and 1999, references to homosexuality during prime-time television increased an amazing 2,650%!” (n.d.)
Sharp’s assertions, though unsupported by research in the document raised a few 
essential concerns pursuant to this study’s findings.  First, research supports that gay and 
lesbian characters were quite prevalent in the 80’s (Sender, 1998), though the depth of 
their characters may not have been equal to some that showed up in cable productions, in 
particular The L Word, seen on Showtime.  Second, Hollywood, if the term can be used to represent television programmers, was more than happy to exclude any substantive 
presence of LGBT sub-culture in prime time broadcast television, at least in the recent 
past, with regard to this study’s findings.  Third, it was not known if Sharp codified all 
references to homosexuality, positive and negative, which would have inflated the 
quantitative results, but decreased the qualitative result of his assertion that Hollywood 
was indeed supportive of a ‘gay America’.  Fourth, Sharp insinuated some collusion with 
the “recruitment” theorists who believed heterosexuals could be ‘convinced’ to become 
homosexual through nurture methods as the corollary, nature, might have been 
unthinkable.  Fifth, any reputable writer with the audacity to report a number as high as 
2,650% (complete with exclamation point) should have been willing to cite the source of 
their mathematics.  Sixth, this researcher agreed with Sharp in the implied statement that 
the new LGBT-focused cable channel, Logo (Viacom), might not be a good thing in 
general.  It will be a definite and positive addition to the LGBT community as long as 
Viacom allows the narratives to be created by LGBT writers and producers so as to 
sustain realistic portrayals and decrease the negativities of stereotypes.  That said, if 
current trends of segregated viewing continue, the larger society’s ability to learn from 
the LGBT community’s narratives and stories will be gravely curtailed.   

Huntemann and Morgan asserted: 
 “Few groups in society experience such strong tensions over sexuality as gay and lesbian teens do.  In a cultural climate that is still largely hostile to homosexuality, the paucity of positive role models in the media is disturbing.”  (2001, p. 315) 
Past representations of gay, lesbian and bisexual characters could be seen in programs such as Roseanne, Golden Girls, Picket Fences and Soap (Sender, 1998).

These prime time portrayals have been few and far between since, with bright spots and 
dim dispersed throughout.  The children polled in the Children Now study said it was 
important to see images of people who look like them on television (1998).  The lesbian, 
gay, bisexual and transgender teenagers, no less aspirational in their viewing behaviors, 
no less important in their need for personal self-esteem and social validation, might have 
also thought it was important to see images of people that looked, lived and loved like 
them on television. 

Age - Cultural Parameter Report


(from "Cultural Bias In Prime Time Television", Pg.178)  

Age 

 1) Younger characters showed great momentary implicit and direct authority over 
older characters, usually at the expense of Culture/National Origin/Race dynamic.   
a) Detective Morris (African-American) raises voice disrespectfully to his wife (African-American) in defense of younger (White) Halliwell sisters.
b) Young female (White) character in Smallville disrespectfully addresses older male (African-American) in order to distract him and allow friends
to breach a roadblock.
c) Teenagers in That 70’s Show vandalize the home of their British high school music teacher.

 2) Teens showed some semblance of respect to elders in a small number of 
programs, partly due to the lack of teen focus and main and/or recurring characters in five of the programs.  A teen character, Keiko, was verbally disciplined by her mother, 
essentially validating Keiko’s ability to persevere in the face of adversity in Gilmore 
Girls (Program Sample 05/#5).  In the same episode, Rory cried on her grandfather’s 
shoulder for support after she found herself in a challenging personal relationship.  Rory 
was generally close to her mother throughout the program samples.  Clark, in Smallville
sought the council of his mother and father with challenging social situations at school.  
7th Heaven displayed the highest quality of teen-parent respect, with a high degree of 
respect and love being placed with the children, in the Camden family and out. 
Mediascope reported, “7th Heaven, Gilmore Girls, and Smallville all provide models of 
warm parent-teen relationships” (2004, p. 128), but also stated, “the parent-teen 
relationships on That 70’s Show are also extremely close” (ibid).  Mediascope’s analysis 
in this area with regard to That 70’s Show conflicted sharply with the findings of this 
study. 

 3) Elderly people were rarely present and were never featured as main characters, 
indispensable to the storyline or with any substantial level of authority with regard to 
younger characters or peers.  

 Johnston stated, with regard to the elderly: 

 “This affluent segment of society may not switch brands as often as the young
 folks, but they are an empowered group of people who learned the ways of the
world by crusading for the Civil Rights movement, stopping the war in Vietnam,
 inaugurating the movement for women’s equality and initiating the environmental
 protection movement.” (2002, p. 71). 


The elderly had valuable experience to share with teen viewers looking for guidance and 
cues for how to manage life in a modern world; who better but the people who created 
the world teens lived in.  The reality of prime time television was less than welcoming to 
this marginalized segment of society.  “The elderly also are used as symbols of death and 
decay, a topic that often frightens people” (Johnston, 2002, p. 71).  Johnston described 
the prevailing stereotypes of elderly people that included the ornery, crotchety elder, the 
“doddering, old senile fool” and the eccentric and incompetent characters (ibid).  
Johnston stated, conversely, that too often many older men, usually white men, on news 
and talk shows...are portrayed as experienced, wise and trustworthy” (ibid).  Johnston 
punctuated his discussion of elders in television and stated, “The elderly have a wealth of 
stories, both entertaining and informative, to share with the society.  What do we gain by 
screening this out and making them just a bit less than eligible for human equality?” 
(2002, p. 73). 

 4) Teenagers were featured in only half of the program samples and comprised 
dominant numbers of in the cast in only three of those.  They were more likely to be cast 
in sexual situations than any other relational dynamic.  Secondarily, they showed great 
concern for their own or other peers’ looks and physical attributes and/or social standing 
(i.e., popularity, notoriety), especially in That 70’s Show and Smallville7th Heaven 
showed much more depth in issues embraced by teen characters and portrayed in a much 
more realistic fashion, without the sensationalism of Smallville and That 70’s Show

Two popular past teen shows were California Dreams (1992) and Saved By The 
Bell (1989).  They reached near cult status with good-looking ensemble casts, fun teen 
storylines and safe subject matter.  Saved By The Bell spun-off two other shows entitled 
Saved By The Bell: The College Years and Saved By The Bell: Then New Class (Saved 
By The Bell, n.d.).  Both shows were set in California and featured stereotypically sunny 
weather, bikinis when possible and as much pop music as could be generated.  California 
Dreams revolved around a band of the same name populated by the lead characters, in 
which most of the characters sang their own songs (California Dreams, n.d.).  Saved By 
The Bell revolved around the relationships of its main characters that included a 
stereotypical dork character named Screech that survived all three versions of the show.   
Both of these shows were more fluff than serious studies in teen life and challenges.  This was best typified by the show theme songs. 
   
The following are partial lyrics in the Saved By The Bell theme:
 If the teacher pops a test
  I know I'm in a mess
  And my dog ate all my homework last nite
  Riding low in my chair
  She won't know that I'm there
  If I can hand it in tomorrow, it'll be all right
  It's alright 'cause I'm saved by the bell (Saved By The Bell, n.d.) 

 The following are partial lyrics in the California Dreams theme:
 Surf dudes with attitudes (Kinda groovy)
  Laid back moods
  Sky above, sand below (Good vibrations)
  Feelin' mellow
 Won't give it up
  Don't wanna stop
 Don't wake me up
  Don't wake me up if I'm dreamin'
  California dreams
  Just let me lay here in the sun
  Until my dream is done (California Dreams, n.d.) 

Both theme songs gave a look into the stated purposes of both shows.  No viewer was 
challenged by any of the storylines.  The messages were ‘take it easy’, ‘go with the flow’ 
and ‘don’t dare ask me to do anything that I don’t want to do, especially anything 
academic or that requires initiative’; in other words, ‘leave me alone and let me be - a 
stereotypical television-watching teen’.  In actuality, the teens on these two shows were 
somewhat ambitious, at least where cutting class and getting the best of adults was 
concerned.  The California Dreams characters were always hard at work practicing and 
getting gigs at squeaky-clean burger joints.  The process message remained the same with 
regard to the viewer:  We’ll entertain you and you won’t learn anything positive. 

These presentations almost guaranteed a validation of a culture of consumption.  
Even the stereotypical nostalgia-heavy Happy Days was reportedly more valuable than 
this type of approach to teen television or, at least, television with teen characters.  
Desmond reported that after an episode featuring Fonzie, a lead popular character, 
making a trip to a library, “a sudden increase in library card applications followed” 
(2001, p. 41).  Happy Days, though, was as safe as Saved By The Bell and California 
Dreams.  The Happy Days cast wasn’t challenging or gritty, lacking the “edgy” nature of 
today’s teen television.  Bogle reported that their “exploits were puerile enough not to be 
offensive” (2001, p. 218).  Shows like Leave It To Beaver were sterile constructions of 
the stereotypical, faultless White nuclear family.  “The Beave’” got into trouble on a 
regular basis, but was never used as a foil to attack the typical presence of sexism, 
classism or racism inherent in the United States of America in the 1950’s.  This was a 
time of struggle for many citizens and television was not addressing the realities that 
many people lived with, nor that plagued the country as a whole.   Teens were 
stereotyped for the benefit of the advertiser, to keep up appearances for the sake of the 
polite company of the general viewing audience.  The late sixties brought a shift in the 
form of The Mod Squad (1968-1973) that “reached young viewers by touching on the 
new social/political landscape” (Bogle, 2001, p. 156).  The three lead characters had all 
fallen into trouble with the law and were recruited to work undercover for the Los 
Angeles Police Department.  “Their assignment:  to weed out criminals preying on the 
young of America” (Bogle, 2001, p. 157).  The Mod Squad presented a new configuration 
of characters for young United States of America: an African-American man (Clarence 
Williams III), a White woman (Peggy Lipton) and a White man (Michael Cole), 
providing “a mix of action adventure and liberal politics” (Bogle, 2001, p. 157).  Bogle 
went on to say: 

“Young audiences liked the idea of seeing young rebellious edgy heroes, arguing with one another, questioning each other’s motives, and usually fighting for the underdogs.  The producers also shrewdly decided early on no to bite the hand that  fed them: the series could not offend the delicate sensibilities of its young audience.” (2001, p. 157) 

The “edge” was officially introduced into the televisual mix, though, as Bogle went on to 
say, “Despite its counterculture appearance, The Mod Squad was still a cop show” (2001, 
p. 157).  Other shows in the 70’s, like Laverne & Shirley, The Brady Bunch, The Waltons and even Welcome Back Kotter, betrayed that new edge.  All In The Family, which featured younger characters Michael Stivic and Gloria Bunker, retained the social 
edginess in grand style, much to the chagrin of many and the joy of many more (Dates & 
Barlow, 1990). 

 The 1980’s brought shows like Head of the Class, Webster, Small Wonder
Family Ties and the teen favorite, Facts of Life, all featuring young, teenage characters or 
casts, mostly clean-cut shows, but with more of the heart that would typify later 
renditions of teen and youth oriented television.  The 1990’s presented shows as 
seemingly polarized as Full House and Married...With Children, both shows that 
   
revolved around the household and the comings and goings of the warm and the loving or the cold and the belligerent, depending upon which show you were watching.  Neither 
show provided any refreshing or deep insights into the human condition, though Marcy 
D’Arcy was the lone lesbian in Married...With Children’s suburban Chicago world. 

The expanse of television shows featuring teenagers and popular with teenagers 
are telling in their social depth and breadth.  There were not many like The Mod Squad or New York Undercover (featuring African-American and Latino lead actors Malik Yoba 
and Michael DeLorenzo), popular for gritty portrayals and situations, again both police 
shows.  The “edgy” quality of the current program sample belied its lack of embrace of 
serious socio-political underpinnings.  The aspirational teenagers had little to learn from 
depictions of themselves and lacked any regular presence of eldership in the narratives 
for perspective.  The contradiction of the edgy, but shallow cultural presentations was 
typified in the lines of the theme song to the popular show Diff’rent Strokes

Everybody's got a special kind of story
Everybody finds a way to shine,
It don't matter that you got not alot
So what,
They'll have theirs, and you'll have yours, and I'll have mine.
And together we'll be fine....
Because it takes, Diff'rent Strokes to move the world.
Yes it does.  (Classic TV Theme Songs, n.d.) 

There were problems in the world, but they were of no real, practical concern.  It didn’t 
matter that there was socio-cultural inequity in the world.  This was the world of 
advertiser-driven television.  Serious cultural issues were not going to be addressed, 
especially with aspirational teenagers.  Corporate media conglomeration made sure of 
that.  Yes it did. 



Will & Grace - General Critique


(from "Cultural Bias and Prime Time Television", Pg.114)

Will & Grace presented some challenging narrative elements and contradictions 
within the cultural parameters analyzed in this study.  While Will & Grace depicted at 
least quantitatively increased representation of homosexual issues and, to some degree, 
some elements of female self-determination, authority and power, it also presented a 
trivialization of homosexuality to its more base level of expression.  Most of Will & 
Grace’s references to homosexuality referred mainly to sexual activity, dating and 
physicality, excluding the serious issues of social acceptance, political power and long- 
term, monogamous homosexual relationships.  Promiscuity was apparent in all of the 
sampled episodes, usually through some kind of dialogue reference and was 
unaccompanied by any discussion of safe sexual practice or substantial discussion of 
societal ethics with regard to dating, romantic, sexual relationships or marriage. 

The issue of homosexual promiscuity was consistent with heterosexual 
promiscuity references in other sampled shows, particularly That 70’s Show.  Both shows 
and other programs outside of the programs sampled in this study viewed by this 
researcher generally focused comedy on situations referring implicitly to promiscuous 
sexual contact whether with the lead or supporting characters.  Mamaluth and Impett 
identified that most sexual situations in prime time occur between unmarried characters 
(2001).  The difference between Will & Grace and other shows about heterosexuals lies 
in the improbability that the characters will ever discuss monogamous relationships or 
marriage with any depth or regularity.  The petty and confrontational flavor of the writing gave no indication of any abiding level of healthy embrace of generally accepted social mores that tend to be understood in this society. 

 No teenagers were featured in the program samples and rarely, if ever, appeared 
on any other episodes seen by this researcher.  Considering the aspirational viewing 
component in the teenage consumer of these narratives, it presented a challenge for 
young people to try to figure out what their relationship should or could be with 
homosexuals in their own lives, whether the viewer was homosexual or not.  If they did 
not see characters that were like them in age having positive or any relationships with the 
homosexual characters, then teenagers were left with the need to extrapolate their own 
behavior from how the characters treated each other. Therein existed a larger challenge as 
none of the programs in this study showed positive, supportive or healthy sexual, 
romantic and/or loving relationships during the majority of the show.   

 There were always life issues that presented themselves in the narratives.  For 
example, Will and Grace looked into the depth and future of their relationship (Sample 
01/#5).  In another episode, Grace dated two men and Will tried to deal with the growing 
closeness of Jack and Grace when he left to spend time away (Sample 02/#5).  Also, Will 
struggled with whether to tell Grace that Ben, Will’s boss and Grace’s partner, was 
cheating on her with another woman (Sample 02/#6).  Though each of these situations 
seemed standard and realistic in nature, the narratives revealed a mean-spirited, snide and 
sarcastic character to the relationships in all program samples.   It was important to 
reiterate that the show was a sit-com and derived its character from basic comedic 
conversational and situational setups.  Nonetheless, there was no time, other than the 
brief and random afterthought, in which any of the characters made any substantial 
attempt at true understanding of another’s feelings nor did they make any attempt to 
mediate any of the situations with any deep or abiding discussion of the on-going social 
or personal effects of the behaviors displayed through the narratives.   

Inherent in each episode, along with the above “standard” and “realistic” 
situations, was an equally outlandish, sometimes risky or decadent social or personal 
situation that got played out in an exaggerated way.  In Sample 01/#5, Karen enlisted 
Jack’s help to teach her how to cook so that she can avoid having sex with her husband, 
Stan, who she regularly spoke negatively about in deeply sarcastic and disparaging ways 
and who the audience never saw.  Sample 02/#5 presented Rosario in an awful situation.  
Rosario, Karen’s embattled Latina maid, was arrested and jailed, accused of smuggling 
items from another country that actually had been stolen by Karen.  Karen ultimately got 
Rosario out of jail, but not until after a scene in a limo on the way to the jail in which 
Karen leveled a barrage of insensitive jokes at Rosario, Latinos and people who occupy 
the lower economic class.  Even at the suggestion of getting Rosario out of jail, Karen 
responded by saying, “I’m not going to Queens!  There are people living in cabs down 
there” (Sample 02/#5). 

 Seemingly less risky, but still questionable behavior, in two out of three programs 
sampled, food was suggested as a way to soothe and console the spirit.  In Sample 02/#5, 
Jack offered Grace the idea of food so that she can feel better, though not for a physical 
concern.  Worse yet, in Sample 02/#6, Grace suggested to Will during a hard time that he 
have alcoholic drinks and Krispy Kreme donuts.  It was noted that none of the above 
characters mentioned have an ounce of fat on them.  Some might consider Grace too thin.  
If this was a regular behavior of  these characters, it would be highly unlikely and grossly 
unrealistic that they would have had the body types portrayed by the actors in the 
program.  The program samples did not necessarily show the characters engaging in the 
suggested behavior, but it may be significant that the behavior, in and of itself, is 
condoned by the main characters, at least in two out of three episodes viewed for this 
study. 
   
Will & Grace regularly presented negative expressions about the characters on 
many levels. Sample 01/#5 featured Will and Grace on a visit to a beloved high school 
teacher of theirs.  They were very excited to see him and idolized him since they were his students years ago.  He was a writer and was openly homosexual, which was of great 
importance to Will as a gay man and to Grace as someone who fancied herself a writer at 
one time.  Mr. Dudley, the teacher, and his best friend, Sharon, were shown as having a 
similar and not so healthy relationship as Will and Grace.  In one instance, Sharon, a 
heterosexual, calls Mr. Dudley “a miserable old fairy”.  They spent most of the scene 
fighting, bickering and back-biting, a pattern which gave Will and Grace pause to 
consider their own relationship, a rare moment of psychological, emotional and relational 
insight in the programs sampled, other viewed episodes and television programming in 
general.   In another instance, Grace says of Mr. Dudley, “He’s the one that made me 
want to write”, to which Will responds in a disparaging tone, “You don’t write”, to which she acquiesces, “But I wanted to”.   

In a separate scene of this program sample (01/#5),  Karen, while being taught 
unsuccessfully by Jack to cook, became attracted to Ben, Will’s boss played by Gregory 
Hines, an African-American person.  Upon his entry to the apartment, Karen, who said to 
Jack, “Sorry fruit, you’re out of the loop!”, and then began to flirt with Ben.  Will & 
Grace was replete with moments in which characters made hurtful or disrespectful 
statements toward each other or others not present, like poor Rosario, languishing in jail 
for the crimes of her boss, Karen.  Though it was understood that disparaging statements 
have been a part of comedy and humor on and off the small screen, it presented a 
substantial concern of this researcher for the viewers of Will & Grace and especially the 
target audience of this study’s focus, teenagers.  As aspirational viewers, teenagers 
looked to television characters to help them define how they should conduct themselves 
in the world, in their society and how to put into perspective the many cultural offerings 
that they see from day to day. Will & Grace offered no positive references or even trends 
in thought or behavior that this researcher could find in any of the program samples. 

Taking the above findings into account, NOW’s overall rating of Will & Grace as 
a B+ (2002, p. 10) raised some question, if not only an eyebrow.  The show also garnered an A- in the category of Social Responsibility (2002, p. 14), which further confused not only the issue, but also this researcher.  Will & Grace did not show up in any of the Best or Worst of the categories of Gender Composition and Diversity, Violent Content or Sexual Exploitation, which gave rise to the extrapolation that it fell into the B+ to C- range in those areas, having been neither a standout on the positive cutting edge or the most negative of television’s representatives.  The National Organization of Women presented only one other indirect suggestion of any positive or progressive elements in Will & Grace’s regular narrative.  “Sadly missing is a strong, high-profile comedic character in the tradition of I Love Lucy, Murphy Brown, Mary Tyler Moore or 
Roseanne. Do the characters of Rachel (from Friends), Grace (from Will & Grace) or 
Reba qualify to fill that role?” (NOW, 2002, p. 4).  Interesting that NOW asked the 
question with regard to Grace, but did not see fit to answer it for us.  Even the National 
Organization of Women could not find enough about Will & Grace to report positively 
and definitively about, at best regarding Will & Grace of moderate substantive value.