Kilburn, Ashley J., and Brandon R. Kilburn. "Linking the Classroom to the Living Room: Learning through Laughter with the Office." Academy of Educational Leadership Journal 16.2 (2012): 21-31. ABI/INFORM Global; ProQuest Research Library. Web. 11 Feb. 2013.
Instead of taking the normal model for a classroom many business schools are pointing their students towards “The Office”, the capital letters are correct, they are instructing through a television show. This is stupid since “The Office” is past the show’s prime; no one wants to fall asleep watching “The Office” during a business lecture though, which is why it has increased attendance for a class functioning as a watching television class to learn.(Kilburn paragraph 1) Are they too wrapped up in the plot to derive some knowledge from the business side of things though, are there any tests to show that? It may help kids attend class, so is it the professors doing or is the show “The Office” teaching students better than their professors? After all it is just a scripted television show, so learning about diversity, stress, aggression, recalls, advertising, and ethics is all simulated.(Kilburn paragraph 11) The university uses the show as a what-not-to-do guide. Ohio now even offers a History of Jewish humor class, offering to celebrate Jewish comedians. (Kilburn paragraph 4)“Seinfeld” was a comment on society when it was on the air. Kramer, George, Elaine, and Jerry are eccentric and crazy but according to Kilburn, even “Seinfeld” is a useful television show to teach about interaction and relationships, which begs the question, “don’t all sit-coms involve relationships and interactions hence the name situation comedy?”(Kilburn paragraph 6) Of course that question is true because no one wants to end up in jail like the characters in “Seinfeld” for not being able to socially integrate into their society. However “Seinfeld” is not relevant to audiences now because with all the diversity in the world, everyone should have learned to be used to diversity by now, but in case the memo was missed, Kilburn suggests that “The Office” is the imperfect, perfect medicine.
"Loyal Viewers Mean Slow Changes in TV News Ratings." Buffalo News (Buffalo, NY) 2013. Print.
This article talks about television local television shows are hard to gain new popularity because audiences are loyal to their local stations, which is understandable because people are quite connected to their community, there is nothing unusual about that. Then this article begins to explain what Nielsen ratings are, and how networks use them in order to figure out how to improve their stations. Nielsen uses boxes that measure these things as well as diaries(paragraph 2,3). However having access to Nielsen ratings is expensive and is usually only affordable by large networks. Households are given boxes that indicate what television shows are being watched, and these are cycled through families. A direct quote from the article is “It’s not just the size of the audience, it’s the quality as perceived by the advertisers.” (paragraph 20) This means that the size of the audience does not necessarily matter, what matters is how highly educated the show seems to an advertisers. So in other words, more viewers does not mean bigger profits in certain situations, so ratings do not always throw a show off the air. “30 rock”, and “Parks and Recreation” are shows that seem to have higher education jokes, suggesting these people also make higher money, this making them targets of the show and advertising.(paragraph 21) After all the Kardashians go through real problems and “30 Rock” is dramaticized, the Kardashians are completely real, when it comes to the popularity and fame.
Martin, Jake. "Why Sitcoms Matter." America Magazine. America Magazine, 14 Nov. 2011. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.
Sit-coms are a thing of the past with Charlie Sheen’s despicable behavior ruining the genre forever since the whole world metaphorically revolves around Charlie. The Office has exhausted the situations and pays the actors big money to exhaust the whole show. Martin claims that the high art of Leonardo de Vinci is not as personal to audiences as a television show, after all most people would not claim the Mona Lisa as their own but according to Martin people may say “my show” because it shows the audience more about themselves.(paragraph 1) Sit-coms brainwash audiences to join their sadistic cult by helping people to connect with relatable characters that are not real but because it is not entirely realistic that is the part that draws people in, to the point where people watch the fake emotion every week. These sit-coms put a person in an actor/actresses perspective, while reality stars would never do that, after all, they are real. The author also comments that often a hero is relatable when the hero is fallen such as the case with Michael Scott, who is omniscient and stable (paragraph 10). With this description, he sounds like a god, and in a way, he is, because he is the main character.
Russell, Cristel Antonia, Barbara B. Stern, and Barbara B. Stern. "CONSUMERS, CHARACTERS, AND PRODUCTS: A Balance Model of Sitcom Product Placement Effects." Journal of Advertising 35.1 (2006): 7-21. Print.
In this article, the authors have put together a presentation on how characters associate a character with certain products, but it also matters how the audience views the character to see if product placement works. Product placement is used to pay for the television programs. Characters help to create a positive connotation for a product (pg 8). It has been show though that products can also affect how consumers view the characters, it has to seem natural, and sets a tone with the audiences’ knowledge of a company’s reputation. So according to the research done in this article, all of these affect one another like a great big triangle (pg 8). The nature of the show seems to exemplify what the characters will buy, such as in Everybody loves Raymond, Raymond is associated with cake and chips, while his wife, Debra, is associated with the vacuum cleaner (pg 14). However reality shows can do this outright, obviously this is the right way to approach advertising is bluntly. This article argues that it depends on what the tone of the television show indicates whether blunt advertising or subtle product placement should take place. The way products are perceived is whether characters and products give a good message or not, then the consumer will buy into a product or not (pg 15). People buy into marketing from an imaginary character, when reality television stars are real people who never put on a show, when advertising a product in exchange for money.
Myers, Joe, Lexi Brackett, Dannie Chalk, and Andrew Terhune. Academic Universe: Research and Writing at Oklahoma State University. 2nd ed. Plymouth, MI: Hayden-McNeil, 2009. Print.
“The Office” is originally a British television show created by Ricky Gervais. Many British fans stated that this show could not be adapted to an American audience because “The Office” was a commentary on British culture. At the BBC2, the show first aired with low ratings that seemed to indicate that Americans could not duplicate the show with much success either (pg 197). However the layout indicates that the show is set-up like a reality television show, or a mock-documentary. In fact the show may as well be an all out reality show with love blossoming and everyone watching the mundane practice of paperwork for a paper company. While “The Office” thrives in America, it had a whopping fourteen episodes for the British version of “The Office”, ending right after the Christmas special. (pg 199) The show hints more for American audiences that Jim and Pam have feelings for each other and to capitalize on this romance for as long as possible. The plot is carefully adapted with a lot of thought of how to keep the characters basically the same, just with different names, and their mock-documentary admissions in American fashion (pg 209). The office has to go through a lot of uncomfortable situations that are constantly changing in a modern world, where Michael Scott (played by Steve Carrel) sticks out like a thumb because of his socially wrong takes on things such as Diversity Day.(pg 211-212) The British version seems to subdue their reactions more while the American approach does seem to reflect a mocking style of drama that is created in society.