Despite the red carpet glitter of the Oscars, it is no secret that Hollywood has had a far from perfect year at the box office.
And unfortunately for Tinsel Town, its problems go beyond the obvious need for more successful films.
The way we experience both movies and television has evolved. We don\u27t do things together the way we once did. We rent movies and watch them at home rather than going to a local movie theater with family and friends. Box office returns suffer and the centrality of film in our lives is weakened.
The same fragmentation is true in television. Sadly, the kind of cultural reference points provided by the likes of Johnny Carson, Lucille Ball, Jackie Gleason, and more - including the superstar network news anchors in their prime - are fading. They provided a snug sense of intimacy that comes from a shared common experience.
The result? Significant social change brought on by audience fragmentation. The root cause? A proliferation of entertainment options impelled by niche-driven marketing

Burrell, Hedley

Drew, David E.

English

Keck Graduate Institute

Claremont Colleges
Scholarship @ Claremont
CGU Faculty Publications and Research CGU Faculty Scholarship
3-6-2006
Too Many Options Dilute Shared Experience
David E. Drew
Claremont Graduate University
Hedley Burrell
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the CGU Faculty Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion
in CGU Faculty Publications and Research by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact
scholarship@cuc.claremont.edu.
Recommended Citation
This article first appeared in Drew, D.E. and Burrell, H. (2006, March 6). Too Many Options Dilute Shared Experience. Christian
Science Monitor, p. 9. http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0306/p09s01-coop.html
The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
Too many options dilute shared
experience
By David E. Drew, Hedley Burrell / March 6, 2006 at 12:03 pm EST
CLAREMONT, CALIF. AND SARASOTA, FLA.
Despite the red carpet glitter of the Oscars, it is no secret that Hollywood has had a
far from perfect year at the box office.
And unfortunately for Tinsel Town, its problems go beyond the obvious need for
more successful films.
The way we experience both movies and television has evolved. We don't do
things together the way we once did. We rent movies and watch them at home
rather than going to a local movie theater with family and friends. Box office returns
suffer and the centrality of film in our lives is weakened.
The same fragmentation is true in television. Sadly, the kind of cultural reference
points provided by the likes of Johnny Carson, Lucille Ball, Jackie Gleason, and
more - including the superstar network news anchors in their prime - are fading.
They provided a snug sense of intimacy that comes from a shared common
experience.
The result? Significant social change brought on by audience fragmentation. The
root cause? A proliferation of entertainment options impelled by niche-driven
marketing.
Consider: A woman who moved to the US Virgin Islands from the mainland told
friends some years back: "When I watch a network TV show, I have a sense of
being connected to the mainland. It's the idea that we all watch the same shows."
Now, though, many will be watching different entertainment and news shows.
Competition abounds on cable and the Internet. Sophisticated polling and sampling
techniques have made it possible to target TV shows, movies, and sports events to
the precise population subgroup the sponsor seeks as customers.
Fifty years ago, there were 16 instantly recognized Major League Baseball teams;
now there are 30. In the 1970s, everyone knew that Muhammad Ali was the
heavyweight boxing champion. Do you recognize these names: Lamon Brewster,
John Ruiz, Chris Byrd, and Vitali Klitschko? During the past year, each was called
"the heavyweight boxing champion of the world" by a different sanctioning body.
Why? Because by doing so, an unexciting boxing match between little-known
athletes can be marketed as a "heavyweight title fight."
There used to be three dominant TV channels. Now, cable and satellite options
have expanded the channel choices into the hundreds. Bruce Springsteen laments in
song that he has 57 channels, but there is "nothin' on."
Back in the 1950s, there was a predictable diet of movies - dramas, comedies, and
Westerns. Films more readily attracted multiple generations.
Recently, Giovanni Zoppé of the Zoppé Family Circus told The New York Times
that only at the circus can he look out at the audience and see "an 80-year-old
person laughing, a 40-year-old person laughing, a 30-year-old person laughing, all
the way down to a 2- or 3-year-old."
Without question, of course, today's market-driven diversification has yielded
wonderful choices for the choosy consumer. For example, recently a Pittsburg
football fan found she could cheer on the Steelers in the NFL playoffs, while her
European husband watched soccer.
But what we gain as individuals we lose as a society. Consider other examples of a
fragmented communal life:
Suburban soccer parents driving their children to and from games, often over
considerable distances, have created another major generational change. The
youngsters, compared with previous generations playing pickup games, are not
together beforehand and leave shortly after the game. Thus, the shared experience
is watered down.
Sequential use of office space (so-called office "hoteling") and couples working
different shifts and sleeping different hours further diminish the shared experience.
Family members withdraw by surfing the Internet. Families once routinely ate dinner
together. It's a different story now.
Some 100 years ago, sociologist Emile Durkheim identified the importance of social
cohesion and the destructive effects of its absence.
About 50 years later, the producers of such discussed-around-the-water-cooler
TV shows as "I Love Lucy," "Gunsmoke," and "The Honeymooners" clearly
understood the value of the shared experience.
And today we know that such experiences not only shape a society, they are linked
to better health, lower crime rates, and improved learning.
Perhaps we can take our variety of interests and make a point of explaining and
sharing them with others. Failure to do so could waste the valuable social capital
that such sharing might engender. And social capital, in the view of the World
Bank, one of the world's largest sources of development assistance, "is not just the
sum of the institutions which underpin a society - it is the glue that holds them
together."
• David E. Drew, a sociologist, holds the Platt Chair in Education and
Management at the Claremont Graduate University. Hedley Burrell is a
former Washington Post editor and writer, and media adviser to US
government agencies.
© The Christian Science Monitor. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which
this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy.
  


Too Many Options Dilute Shared Experience

Scholarship@Claremont

Claremont CollegesScholarship @ ClaremontCGU Faculty Publications and Research CGU Faculty Scholarship3-6-2006Too Many Options Dilute Shared ExperienceDavid E. DrewClaremont Graduate UniversityHedley BurrellThis Article is brought to you for free and open access by the CGU Faculty Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusionin CGU Faculty Publications and Research by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contactscholarship@cuc.claremont.edu.Recommended CitationThis article first appeared in Drew, D.E. and Burrell, H. (2006, March 6). Too Many Options Dilute Shared Experience. ChristianScience Monitor, p. 9. http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0306/p09s01-coop.htmlThe Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.comToo many options dilute sharedexperienceBy David E. Drew, Hedley Burrell / March 6, 2006 at 12:03 pm ESTCLAREMONT, CALIF. AND SARASOTA, FLA.Despite the red carpet glitter of the Oscars, it is no secret that Hollywood has had afar from perfect year at the box office.And unfortunately for Tinsel Town, its problems go beyond the obvious need formore successful films.The way we experience both movies and television has evolved. We don't dothings together the way we once did. We rent movies and watch them at homerather than going to a local movie theater with family and friends. Box office returnssuffer and the centrality of film in our lives is weakened.The same fragmentation is true in television. Sadly, the kind of cultural referencepoints provided by the likes of Johnny Carson, Lucille Ball, Jackie Gleason, andmore - including the superstar network news anchors in their prime - are fading.They provided a snug sense of intimacy that comes from a shared commonexperience.The result? Significant social change brought on by audience fragmentation. Theroot cause? A proliferation of entertainment options impelled by niche-drivenmarketing.Consider: A woman who moved to the US Virgin Islands from the mainland toldfriends some years back: "When I watch a network TV show, I have a sense ofbeing connected to the mainland. It's the idea that we all watch the same shows."Now, though, many will be watching different entertainment and news shows.Competition abounds on cable and the Internet. Sophisticated polling and samplingtechniques have made it possible to target TV shows, movies, and sports events tothe precise population subgroup the sponsor seeks as customers.Fifty years ago, there were 16 instantly recognized Major League Baseball teams;now there are 30. In the 1970s, everyone knew that Muhammad Ali was theheavyweight boxing champion. Do you recognize these names: Lamon Brewster,John Ruiz, Chris Byrd, and Vitali Klitschko? During the past year, each was called"the heavyweight boxing champion of the world" by a different sanctioning body.Why? Because by doing so, an unexciting boxing match between little-knownathletes can be marketed as a "heavyweight title fight."There used to be three dominant TV channels. Now, cable and satellite optionshave expanded the channel choices into the hundreds. Bruce Springsteen laments insong that he has 57 channels, but there is "nothin' on."Back in the 1950s, there was a predictable diet of movies - dramas, comedies, andWesterns. Films more readily attracted multiple generations.Recently, Giovanni Zoppé of the Zoppé Family Circus told The New York Timesthat only at the circus can he look out at the audience and see "an 80-year-oldperson laughing, a 40-year-old person laughing, a 30-year-old person laughing, allthe way down to a 2- or 3-year-old."Without question, of course, today's market-driven diversification has yieldedwonderful choices for the choosy consumer. For example, recently a Pittsburgfootball fan found she could cheer on the Steelers in the NFL playoffs, while herEuropean husband watched soccer.But what we gain as individuals we lose as a society. Consider other examples of afragmented communal life:Suburban soccer parents driving their children to and from games, often overconsiderable distances, have created another major generational change. Theyoungsters, compared with previous generations playing pickup games, are nottogether beforehand and leave shortly after the game. Thus, the shared experienceis watered down.Sequential use of office space (so-called office "hoteling") and couples workingdifferent shifts and sleeping different hours further diminish the shared experience.Family members withdraw by surfing the Internet. Families once routinely ate dinnertogether. It's a different story now.Some 100 years ago, sociologist Emile Durkheim identified the importance of socialcohesion and the destructive effects of its absence.About 50 years later, the producers of such discussed-around-the-water-coolerTV shows as "I Love Lucy," "Gunsmoke," and "The Honeymooners" clearlyunderstood the value of the shared experience.And today we know that such experiences not only shape a society, they are linkedto better health, lower crime rates, and improved learning.Perhaps we can take our variety of interests and make a point of explaining andsharing them with others. Failure to do so could waste the valuable social capitalthat such sharing might engender. And social capital, in the view of the WorldBank, one of the world's largest sources of development assistance, "is not just thesum of the institutions which underpin a society - it is the glue that holds themtogether."• David E. Drew, a sociologist, holds the Platt Chair in Education andManagement at the Claremont Graduate University. Hedley Burrell is aformer Washington Post editor and writer, and media adviser to USgovernment agencies.© The Christian Science Monitor. All Rights Reserved. Terms under whichthis service is provided to you. Privacy Policy.  

https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1044&amp;context=cgu_fac_pub

Too Many Options Dilute Shared Experience

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Keck Graduate Institute

Scholarship@Claremont