We’ve come once again to one of America’s favorite times of the year.  In many homes, it’s anticipated more than Christmas.  And like the winter holiday season, it’s a time when stories are told and people wait in anticipation.  Also, there’s a lot of money changing hands.  It’s television sweeps month. 

There’s a flurry of ads out attempting to grab the attention of people who might care that there are only three episodes left of this sitcom, or there are only a few contestants left in a “reality” competition.  It seems that every sentence spoken has at least one exclamation point behind it, if not three or four.  You absolutely must see this or that program or your life will be incomplete(!!!). 

Sweeps, of course, is important for television networks, because twice per year they set their advertising rates based on the kinds of ratings they get for the month.  Bigger audiences mean bigger paychecks.  So naturally, they sell their shows hard.  They often do so by “starving” their faithful viewing audience for several weeks leading up to May, with reruns, and programming schedule changes.  Heck, I’ve seen ads lately for one long-running drama that say, “Starting next week, 4 brand new episodes!!”  If that’s a thing worth bragging about, one wonders how long faithful viewers have been watching reruns.  It’s a little like the fruit drinks marketed toward kids that boast, “Now with 10% real fruit!”  Never mind the other 90%.

And, just like Christmas, it’s not uncommon for people to have a sense of “let down” once it’s all over.  “You mean, I rearranged my schedule for that?”

The interesting thing about sweeps these days is that it’s becoming decreasingly relevant.  In part, because people aren’t actually rearranging their schedules around their shows – who needs to when you’ve got TiVo?  And oh, by the way, TiVo can edit out the advertisements.  Madison Avenue has issues.

But rest assured, Madison Avenue will figure things out, and I would suspect it won’t take long.  These are, after all, the kinds of creative wonderbrains that gave us all those clever animals – frogs selling beer, ducks selling insurance, lizards selling car insurance.  You can be assured that their creative juices will continue to flow in a direction of getting their messages out.  It will mean more product placement within the actual shows we watch.  It may mean technological ways of tricking digital video recorders. 

Whatever the case, it will mean more clever forms of manipulation.  That may be an overly harsh way of putting it, given that people in this culture willingly turn on the media, and they can choose to watch or turn off whatever they please.  The point that advertisers know, though, is that they won’t.  They are voluntary subjects in the manipulative game.  Adbusters wants us to turn off the television in order to prove a point (or several), but even that plays the game according to the current rules of engagement.  It may be a great place to start, but it’s only a start.

I believe that there is actually a missional way to watch television.  It goes beyond trying to find a gospel message hiding behind the plots of true crime dramas.  It has to do with stories – but the ones being played out by the watchers, not just the actors.  How we continue to observe the stories of others, write our own, and act redemptively with the message of the Kingdom is something we have influence over.  Our task is to apply those observations, simply by sharing life with people.  Asking someone what their favorite TV show may the easiest way of making a connection – it’s so obvious that it’s often forgotten.

By writing this article, I don’t mean to bash TV shows or the nature of media capitalism.  There is a lot there to criticize, mind you, but I’ll leave that for another time.  I do mean to bash the assumed ignorance of the viewers.  We are the choosers.  We need to own our choices, as well as their consequences.  And if we’re not willing to be active participants, then by all means, we should turn off our televisions.  That is, at least until the November sweeps.

Exactly. Well said.
--Brooks Hanes ( brooks at brookshanes dot com ) on 5/6/2005; 8:02:02 PM