I suppose I should begin by explaining what I mean when I say ‘disposable media.’ The term, invented – as far as I know – by myself, can conjure images of single-use DVDs (they really were a thing) or people watching rented movies. This is not at all the intention. No, when I refer to ‘disposable media’ I am referring to that media which is meant to be watched and enjoyed in the time in which it is made, but typically has little re-watch value in the future. Examples of such entertainment are game shows, topical political shows, late night talk shows, and reality competition shows. These are all filmed, edited, and exhibited with little intention of crafting experiences that will stand the test of time. That said, while it might be easy to view such a statement as a negative given that one of the prime benefits of audio/visual media is its potential longevity, I actually see it as a strength – a fact that makes the viewing of such media feel intrinsically different that those without such shelf lives. Let’s talk about why.
A Primer – SNL and My Personal History
While the aim of this essay is not to speak about myself, I find it impossible to tackle this topic without making at least some reference to my own experience and history with such fleeting forms of media. In truth, the difference between this particular subset of entertainment and others only truly began to occur to me about a decade ago – as I was watching on old episode of Saturday Night Live from the 70’s or 80’s (the specifics of the particular episode have since vanished from my memory). The episode in question contained a number of skits wherein the performers pretended to be prominent political figures and pop-culture celebrities (a staple of the show). Given my age, and the fact that I was not alive during the time at which these individuals or their news stories were the talk of the town, the large majority of jokes in these particular skits went far over my head. Any humor that was to be wrung from those stories was predicated on a first-hand knowledge of events to which I was not privy.
Such an experience led me quite quickly to the realization that despite the multitude to talented performers on display in these older episodes, their re-watch value for those not steeped in the cultural climate of the time was greatly diminished. That said, there were still those skits that were more premise-based (a parody of infomercials, for example) and thus could be enjoyed without much distraction (other than some outdated tropes or verbiage). Still, the fact that so much hard work and talent could be poured into something with a built-in ‘best by’ date was shocking. Surely both the writers and performers would have preferred to have had greater staying power with their creations – wouldn’t they? Why then would they saddle their work with so many topical, and thus time sensitive, references and issues? This answers were not clear to me at the time, but as I got older (and more informed) they would eventually reveal themselves.
Big Winner!
Still, while SNL was limited by it topicality, the humor found in those recorded images could (theoretically) be enjoyed for many, many re-watches (just like that found in our favorite films). The same could not be said of game shows (and, later, reality competition shows). While shows such as these were rarely limited by the types of cultural reference found in sketch comedy (someone spinning a wheel or answering trivia is relatively timeless, after all), any given episode – or season – really only lent itself to a single viewing. Unlike humor, which can be enjoyed again and again, you can only find out if the contestant wins the prize once – after that, repeat views would just be an exercise in futility and boredom. Much like a live sporting event, the excitement comes from the unknowable nature of the outcome. How players will behave, and if they will find fortune, are the primary drivers of audience engagement. Once that initial mystery has worn off, there is very little of substance to appreciate.
It occurs to me that the primary way that creators of such media chose to combat these issues was by way of volume. While any individual episode might lose its luster after a single viewing, the (relatively) low cost and quick turnaround time of creation allowed for large and expansive seasons that could be shot in a truncated period of time. With as many as sixty (60!) episodes shot per year, and many years (if they were lucky) of production, such shows could keep viewers coming back again and again. Sure, there were no ongoing narratives or returning characters (outside of perhaps the host – and even then not always), but it was easy-to-follow single-sitting viewing that allowed the watcher to turn his or her brain into ‘low-power’ mode. In a world full of hustle and bustle, this can be a very appealing option. Still, as with SNL, it seemed a shame that so much time and talent be expended for something with next to no re-watchability.
And our Next Guest is…
Moving to a category that manages to find both late night talk shows and those with (sometimes biting) political commentary, we find a group of media that manages to exemplify all of the negative aspects found in both of the above examples. While it might be slightly unfair to group these two (admittedly different) sub-genres together, in recent years there has been an ever-increasing shift in both of these categories that has brought them closer together than ever before, with each overlapping onto the toes and traditional space of the other. Look no further than the now-ratings-dominant The Late Show with Stephen Colbert to see just such an example in real-time.
The reason that I say this group has to deal with all of the shortcoming of both previously mentioned should be obvious. Like SNL, many of the jokes or interviews are predicated on an audience member being (at least vaguely) aware of the current goings-on in either Washington or Hollywood. The relative excitement at seeing a particular star on stage promoting their next film is based on the viewer’s knowledge of WHO that star is and if they are excited to see the upcoming project – a project that, in time, will be long-available and potentially on sale in the clearance rack. Look no further than with interviews with stars-gone-by or cagy conversations about spoilers for a Star Wars movie that is now public knowledge. No doubt neither of them hold the same weight (if any) they did when they were fresh. The same is true of topical political commentary, no matter how biting.
On the other side of the coin, these programs are just as (if not more so) un-re-watchable as a typical installment of a game show. Once the news is old and forgotten, the promoted film is out of theaters, and the jokes have already been heard, there is little incentive to view said media again. Not only is this true in the immediate future, it is even more so as time progresses. The stories that are told age into obscurity and the unpredictable nature of a given guest is dampened by the knowledge of just what they will or won’t say. Shows such as these, much like game shows before them, attempt to rail against this issue with the sheer volume of produced content – many of these are daily shows, each airing a single episode for each day of the workweek (there are, of course, some notable exceptions, such as Last Week Tonight with Jon Oliver). Thus, if each of the other discussed genres of media has their own shortcomings, why would someone then think it is a good idea to create ones that capitalize on and expand on all of them? Does it not hurt to see such effort expended on what can only be a temporary pleasure?
The Beauty
With all of the seeming complaints and drawbacks levied at this corner of the media landscape, you might rightly be wondering just what about it makes it so worthwhile – after all, would not talents be better spent creating something that will stand the test of time? To that, though it is far from the only defense, I would posit the entire existence of the theatre (that is, live theatrical performances). One of the beauties of going to see a play (or any live performance) is both its electrifying engagement with the present and the temporary nature of its existence. You are able to sit with a group of your fellow humans, many of which you likely do not know, and all experience the same journey together. That fact that anything can happen (from a line flub, to a particularly moving performance) only adds to the excitement. The limited and fleeting nature, and thus rarity, of the performance given lends an air of immediacy and importance that is hard to capture otherwise – it is, in fact, the same argument that can be made for seeing a film in theaters with an audience as opposed to at home alone. If the temporary nature in this case can be a strength, why not also with such ‘disposable media?’
Speaking of the engagement and shared experience, when you take part in viewing a game show or Late Night interview with the rest of the country (or world), you know you do so concurrently with others who all have the same cultural reference points as yourself. You feel a connection to the material on politics through its relevance to your daily life and the conversations you have. You know that the next day at work (or with your friends) you can all talk about that joke, or gameplay moment, or piece of political commentary. In a world where timed release and binge watching mean that viewers are rarely on the same page with one another (“No spoilers! I’m only on Season 2, Episode 6!”), the very time-sensitive nature of an SNL skit or Keanu Reeves interview means that most everyone who is going to watch it already has. It frees you to have the types of ‘watercooler conversations’ over media that have all but vanished from our daily lives.
Particularly when dealing with political and cultural issues, enjoying shows that touch on these very real and immediate topics in a timely way can not only serve to inform us (yes, you can learn from comedy) but to expand our worldview and perspective in near real-time. It can help make us more engaged citizens, better aware of the political and cultural shifts that might be easy to miss in our own little bubbles of interaction. Busy with the stresses and worries of daily life, it can be easy to overlook stories or events – particularly in the 24/7 news cycle that has come to be the new norm. These easy-to-digest glimpses into such issues can also serve to present sometimes complex and hard to swallow notions as something to which we can relate. This does not make such things a replacement for actual news, mind you, but it does offer a different (and often much more enjoyable) lens thorough which to view the world.
But, as mentioned briefly before, far from the learning and perspective enhancing nature found in some of these creations, one of the other large benefits they provide is their ability to take our mind off of world in which we live. Like all good media, escapism is a primary reason in which engage with it. But beyond just living in a different world, with characters whose experiences differ from our own, ‘disposable media’ can allow our brains to run in as a basic a mode as possible. Sometimes it’s just fun to watch people fall down (America’s Funniest Home Videos), spin a wheel for cash and prizes (The Price is Right), or sing in a car with celebrities (The Late Late Show with James Cordon). Appealing to the basest level of our mind, far from a lowly pursuit, can often be just what the doctor ordered. Not worrying about on-going storylines, character development, or needing to invest any longer than an hour can be freeing. We can sit back and become passengers, entranced by the immediate – for in that moment there is no past, no future, or even a world outside of our screen. It simply is, no thought required.
Conclusion
While it would no doubt be easy to classify all the above as an over-examination of a type of media not worth such effort, that would be a fallacy. While individual episodes of a game show, a late night talk show, a political commentary/comedy, or a reality competition might be easy to forget and contain little reason to re-engage, the totality of its existence is something hard to argue with. For one, they can become institutions – ongoing event television that can be passed and changed from one generation to the next (How many iterations of SNL or The Tonight Show have there been, each with their own sense of humor or impact?). They can create cultural icons and touchstones of their hosts (Carson, Letterman, Leno, Fallon, Colbert) and can result in unforgettable memories (The Beatles first taking the stage on American television). Just as in an ant colony, where the individual might fail to have a measurable impact, the totality manages to succeed on a scale unimaginable.
But it is not just those franchises with dynastic legacies that lead to the merit of the genre – even ones with short runs, all but forgotten in the sands of time, could have lasting and positive impacts. A smile on a bad day. A family brought together around the television. A conversation or debate sparked by some event or moment. The enrichment of people’s lives is not simply limited to what can be written in the annals of audio/visual history – it can be found in the small and fleeting joys brought on by its very existence. The connection with the rest of the country (or world) and the engagement with topics that interweave themselves into the fabric of our lives. The fact that we choose to spend a portion of our lives living in the moment – connecting with the here and now, with those things which are the building blocks of our culture and the world in which we live, or with those that just bring us happiness.
What greater purpose could we ask of our media?
Who cares if we’ll never watch it again.
Chris