It wouldn’t be a stretch to say that technology drives the world faster and forward. And technology isn’t static. There is a new technology or a different use of existing technology that comes out on a weekly or at times even a daily basis. It affects almost all aspects of our lives. It has changed how we shop, bank, travel and even how we watch and interact with media. Media has changed a lot over the years with changes in technology. As people adapt to newer technologies, media too has shaped itself to give in to the new demands of its consumers. Just as technology affects media, it also affects the viewing patterns of the people. A person no longer has to have a TV to watch what he or she wants. A smartphone or a tablet would do the job. Live shows can be streamed anywhere or saved to be viewed later. However it is not as simple as it sounds. Technology has disrupted not only the viewing patterns and how media is being packaged but also changes the way people react to what is being shown to them. People are influenced by the visuals and messages in different ways and it affects the way they process fictional as well as real life narratives. Political campaigns and debates among the candidates are not viewed differently than before.
Long before the internet revolutionised the way information is shared and distributed, TV ruled the roost. It was when people made changes in their daily schedules to view a certain program. “In TV, narrative has always been an outgrowth of the delivery mechanism. Why are there cliffhangers? So you’ll tune in next week. Why are shows a half-hour or an hour long? Because real-time viewing required predictable schedules. Why do episodes have a multiple-act structure? To leave room for the commercials (Poniewozik 2015).” But with the onset of internet and streaming technology people no longer have to wait for a week or days to know what’s coming next. Binge watching which has been enabled by streaming lets the viewer watch what he or she wants at any time with or without breaks. This changes how the content is developed for shows. And also changes how the viewer digests the information. There is no longer a sense of suspense as the viewer can always click on the next episode or skip episodes to watch the end or the twist. Poniewozik writing about streaming technology and content on amazon and netflix says, “Watching a streaming series is even more like reading a book — you receive it as a seamless whole, you set your own schedule — but it’s also like video gaming. Binge-watching is immersive. It’s user-directed. It creates a dynamic that I call “The Suck”: that narcotic, tidal feeling of getting drawn into a show and letting it wash over you for hours (Poniewozik 2015).” This however is not completely true when it comes to watching real life narratives like a political campaign.
Although political campaigns are designed and packaged to garner maximum support and viewership from the people, they do not fall into the same category as films or sitcoms. They do not follow a specific storyline or a pattern. And unlike the rest, political campaigns call for undivided attention from the viewer. The viewer has to watch the debate at that particular time or day it is being televised in order to keep up. “The early days of broadcast gave us great shows, like “Playhouse 90,” that were essentially live theater that happened to be televised, but the medium didn’t come into its own until it learned to use what made it distinctive — the ability to tell open-ended ongoing stories (Poniewozik 2015).” Although it has its suspenses and fair share of drama, the viewer is made to process a real life narrative in a different manner from that of fiction.
The gaps between the debates and other political campaign tactics leaves the viewer with a lot of time to digest what is being offered and said. There is a lot more space and time to process whatever is happening on the political scene. There is even the possibility of comparing the different campaigns and analyze the level of manipulation each campaigns indulge in. A real life narrative is also processed by the viewer in an analytical level. Unlike other shows in offer, political campaigns have the power to group people in different categories and also affect them in real life. Viewing habits change. Instead of a laidback watching of a debate or a campaign after a week or watch everything together as could be done with other shows, the viewer tunes it at the exact time. The viewing habits that has been modified by streaming and binge watching do not really have much of an impact when it comes to real life narratives. The timeframe of a real life narrative is important for the political campaigners as well as the viewers as it impacts them directly. Information given needs to be processed before the next debate or the change in campaign tactics. Viewing habits change again with TV deciding the narrative.
Processing the information onslaught depends on how the information is being seen and understood. Binge watching helps process the whole story line or plot in a few hours as opposed to the weeks and months it would take on TV. Binge watching however does not apply to real life narratives. Real life narratives are time specific and need to be processed carefully and analytically. Viewing habits impact the ability to process real life narratives as now the habits are changed again. The viewer is no longer the deciding authority about when and how a program could be watched. He or she is at the mercy of television stations and political campaigners. the processing of information is thus dependent on the packaging as well as the time they are being shown.
Works Cited
Poniewozik, James. “Streaming TV Isn’t Just a New Way to Watch. It’s a New Genre.” New York times. 16 Dec 2015. Web. 10 Mar 2016.
