| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "TALK SHOWS": |
|
|
Talk Shows, 2004.
Uses Tom Shachtman's "Talk Shows and the Dumbing of America" to discuss selected daytime and nightime talk shows.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the point made by Tom Shachtman, in his essay "Talk Shows and the Dumbing of America", that talk shows are indicative of a dumbing down of America. The discussion focuses on talk shows such as Oprah, Jerry Springer, Maury Povich and uses the Hilton sisters as examples of the types of people to whom Shachtman is referring.
From the Paper
"Tom Shachtman, in his essay titled "Talk Shows and the Dumbing of America", makes the point that the talk shows that are featured on network and cable television tend to present a portrait of America and Americans that is indicative of a gradual dumbing down effect. It is Shachtman's thesis that despite the inherent literacy of the people who create talk shows, the vast majority of these programs present individuals, both celebrities and ordinary people, who seem to be largely illiterate, unable..."
| |
|
TV Talk Shows, 2008.
An analysis of the article, "Talk Show Telling versus Authentic Telling: The Effects of the Popular Media on Secrecy and Openness" by Evan Imber-Black.
1,070 words (approx. 4.3 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the argument presented by Evan Imber-Black, in her article "Talk Show Telling versus Authentic Telling: The Effects of the Popular Media on Secrecy and Openness", that television talk shows have greatly diminished our moral views of what consequences may arise from casually revealing life-changing secrets. The paper maintains that Imber-Black fails to provide enough substantial evidence to support her argument. The paper is of the opinion that this article is a simplistic, one-sided view of those who watch TV talk shows.
From the Paper
"At first glance, and from Imber-Black's psychiatric view, this atmosphere of greater openness brought benefits. Patients were less reluctant to reveal secrets that once might not have been raised. None the less, a frightening cultural shift was taking place. With the rising popularity of "ambush" style talk shows, people began to correlate opening secrets with the belief such actions were virtuous and automatically healing. What was once deeply personal and unmentionable was becoming a popular spectacle on a grand scale and was simply assumed to be cathartic."
| |
|
Talk Shows or Freak Shows, 2004.
An look at the history of talk shows and how they have evolved over time.
2,268 words (approx. 9.1 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 70.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the format of the original talk shows, as well as how the format has evolved over time to become more of a provocative freak show that harms the guests appearing on the show and promotes negative stereotypes of American society. The paper also describes how the guests are manipulated and antagonized on the show into exhibiting extreme reactions.
From the Paper
"More than half a century ago, in November 1947, the first talk show in entertainment history was broadcast on American television. Named, "Meet the Press," it had first started two years earlier as a radio show that combined news and chat (Halter). The 'chat' aspect acquired immediate popularity, motivating television producers to concentrate more on this characteristic and to produce more focused chat shows. The first of these specialized chat shows, aired in 1950, was named "The Tonight Show," (Halter). Hosted by the popular media personality, Steve Allen, this show took on "a more relaxed, conversational approach," with the guest list including both famous celebrities and ordinary citizens (Halter). Its popularity was based on the fact that viewers felt that the show appealed to their human and sociable side, in addition to informing them about the real problems of both ordinary and famous people. That is, it communicated the very simple message that life was both fun at times and difficult at others but, the important thing was to accept life as it was (Halter). This show, as with those that came later, was extremely popular among American viewers and, did present a positive and realistic picture of American society, in addition to entertaining and advising people. Despite the solid and positive foundations of the talk show, a great majority of those currently aired can only be described as unrealistic and negative, to the extent that they apparently focus on scandal and sex alone. Even though currently popular talk shows appear to be based on genuine emotional reactions and stories, they are based on extreme emotional reactions that guests are manipulated into displaying through the provocative nature of the questions asked. Guests are coached to lie and the audience is manipulated into incorrectly believing that they are watching 'real life.' The consequence is the promotion of negative stereotypes of American society."
| |
|
Defense of Talk Shows, 2001.
Discusses usefulness for society, Jenny Jones, Oprah Winfrey & other talk show hosts.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 6 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"It is an exercise in redundancy to make the case that our society is a violent one. It is an arguable contention(one that surely will be validated on the pages of any history book) that humankind is simply a quarrelsome breed; one that has, since the inception of the social contract, existed amidst countless acts of violence and indiscretion. As a matter of course, we have always sought to determine the causes of such violence and social degradation, and to trace those elements in society that are assumed to perpetuate aggressive and uncivilized behavior in the masses. Theater, art, music, political rallying, propaganda- all of these and more have been branded as contributors to the deterioration of our collective moral fiber. Today, talk shows have emerged as the.."
| |
|
Late-Night Talk Shows, 1994.
This paper discusses the late-night talk shows: Economic history from 1953's "Tonight Show" debut through David Letterman's 1993 move to CBS, advertising revenues, ratings, successes and failures.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 14 sources, $ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Late night talk shows are a highly profitable venture for television networks when they attract an audience, and they are a drain on the network coffers and network credibility when they do not. For many years, the late night programming area was staid and unexciting. NBC's Tonight Show dominated the 11:30 time period, and for the last decade the same network's Late Night with David Letterman was also a high ratings winner. Other networks attempted talk shows at the late hour and floundered as Johnny Carson, host of the Tonight show for 29 years, continued to draw the bulk of the audience. A secondary franchise was created by the Iranian hostage crisis--Nightline on ABC came into being first as a nightly report on the hostage situation and then as a continuing late night news program with a strong core audience. Syndication was another challenge with hosts like ... "
| |
|
Talk Shows On Daytime TV, 1999.
Social psychological analysis of reasons for these shows' popularity and the guests' willingness to discuss private matters, the social role of the shows, problem-solving and therapeutic effects.
2,700 words (approx. 10.8 pages), 6 sources, $ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
It is clear why television networks favor daytime talk shows with sensational subject matter and contentious guests over daytime talk shows with serious purpose and dignity. As is most apparent with the Jerry Springer show, the sensational shows garner ratings.
From the Paper
"America Spills Its Guts
Introduction
It is clear why television networks favor daytime talk shows with sensational subject matter and contentious guests over daytime talk shows with serious purpose and dignity. As is most apparent with the Jerry Springer show, the sensational shows garner ratings. Springer even out polled Oprah with his emphasis on violent confrontations.
However, even more serious talk shows, like Oprah, emphasize subjects that are highly personal and showcase guests who are willing to spill their guts about private matters. This is less understandable. The intention in this paper is to look at some of the theories about why people spill their guts on daytime talk television, with a focus on Phil Donahue as the forerunner and ..."
| |
|
Talk Show Performance, 2004.
An analysis of the nature, processes and roles of the 'ritual of performance' in talk shows on American television.
2,893 words (approx. 11.6 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 85.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents the idea that the ritual of performance has become the primary factor that determines the talk show's function and importance not only to the mass media, but most importantly, to its audience. Through this discussion and analysis, the paper carries with it the thesis that indeed, the ritual of performance is the most important process that talk shows can offer to its audience and viewers in American society today.
From the Paper
"Television, being the most accessible and audio-visually-appealing mass medium, has introduced and cultivated numerous innovations and new ideas that became part of the American popular culture. Since its inception in the 1940s, television had then invaded the homes of numerous Americans, with its commercial availability a decade later, during the 1950s. The TV has become a household necessity for the Americans in the twentieth century, becoming a constant companion of American families, providing them with the latest news and information about the America and the world, as well as entertaining them with numerous shows that range from fictional depictions (sitcoms, soap operas) to real-life discussions and illustrations of life through talk and game shows."
| |
|
Ethics, Talk-Show Hosts, and Producers, 2004.
A look at the way talk-show hosts and producers violate ethical codes of conduct in their profession.
1,578 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper argues that talk TV shows are responsible for physical or emotional harm, as talk-show hosts and producers deliberately anger guests and shock them into extreme and unthoughtful emotional reactions.
From the Paper
"Like most media viewers realize, the media plays a large role n shaping their opinions and forming their attitudes towards issues and people. As viewers, many of us respect and admire TV personalities, believing that talk show hosts, for example, reached their positions because they have something important to say. In other words, Jerry Springer viewers can be easily influenced by his opinions and the content of his show when they look at his ratings and discover that millions are watching an listening to him. Of course there are many who know that the media should not always be listened to because the views and information offered could e prejudiced, or who realize that one should not allow the views of a talk show host to influence him as they could be subjective ones. The problem is that not all media viewers have this awareness. Therefore, it is very important that the media follow the code of ethics that was established specifically for it. In the media code of ethics there is one simple, but very important rule, which is respecting others. As "Panel: Dr. Laura Violates Ethics Code," explains, the media should not promote opinions that will, in any way, encourage discrimination, hatred or actions that will motivate people to go against the human rights of others. Quite simply, the media should not promote hatred, incite rage, or encourage people to fight with, or harm others. The media has a moral responsibility towards its viewers. Unfortunately, when one looks at the current popular talk TV shows, such as Jerry Spring, Jenny Jones, Maury Povich, Ricki Lake and others, one finds that there is a real disregard for this ethical code. Guests are encouraged to display rage, be violent, exhibit discrimination and even deliberately incited by TV hosts and producers to display extreme levels of negative emotion towards others. The consequence is that guests are often psychologically and physically harmed by other guests, with TV talk show hosts an producers arguing that it is not their responsibility but the responsibility of the guests themselves. While it is true that it is the guests who inflict harm upon one another, the fact is that the talk TV shows are responsible for the physical or emotional harm as talk show hosts and producers deliberately anger guests and shock them into making extreme and unthoughtful emotional reactions."
| |
|
"What We Talk About When We Talk About Love", 2002.
A review of the short story, "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" by Raymond Carver.
1,493 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Raymond Carver's short story, "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love". The paper illustrates the plot and the setting of the short story, and describes the story's conversation between two couples. The characters are analyzed and their personalities are examined with reference to their current and past marriages.
From the Paper
"The conversation involves two couples. The protagonist is Nick who is happily married to Laura; they are at the home of a cardiologist, Mel Guinness, and his wife Terri (Teresa). Mel and Terri have been married for four years; Nick and Laura, for a little more than a year. So let?s visit some of the definitions of love: According to Mel, "real love [is] nothing less than spiritual love." (Carver, p. 137) This was from his days as a seminarian before going to medical school."
| |
|
"What We Talk about When We Talk about Love", 2005.
Explain's Raymond Carver's use of sunlight as a symbol in his story, "What We Talk about When We Talk about Love".
1,061 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper shows how the author, Raymond Carver, uses "sunlight" throughout the story as a symbol of the story's progress, mood, and characters.
From the Paper
"In the story, "WHAT WE TALK ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT LOVE", one apparent symbol of this story is sunlight. The element of sunlight serves as an indicator of the mood in each scene where it is mentioned. The amount of sunlight described in this short story at any given point reflects many things. The amount sunlight reflects at what point the story is in, beginning, middle, or end. The amount of sunlight reflects the mood of the characters. The amount of sunlight also reflects the characters' willingness to discuss the topic of love."
| |
|
"What We Talk About When We Talk About Love", 2002.
Examines the theme of love in Raymond Carver's short story.
1,380 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 1 source, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In the short story "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" by Raymond Carver, the discussion of love and the nature and relationships of the four characters reflect the same issues, the same ideas and the same difficulties. The paper shows that the discussion has the aura of something that is repeated over and over, as if these four talk about love often. They clearly know one another very well and know all about each other's loves, past and present, yet they still talk about them and their feelings endlessly, as if doing so enables them to understand those feelings and themselves. The paper examines the interaction in dialogue and relationships between the four characters, Mel, Terri, Nick and Laura.
From the Paper
"The central question raised is what constitutes love, and this is raised in terms of how certain actions and behaviors might claim to be love but really cannot be. That, at least, is Mel's point of view when Terri talks about the man she lived with before: "Terri said the man she lived with before she lived with Mel loved her so much he tried to kill her" (256). Mel takes umbrage at this characterization: "That's not love, and you know it" (256). Terri's description of what the man did to her is especially brutal, but all the while the man continued saying that he loved her even as he beat her and dragged her around the room. Underlying this talk is a certain tension between Mel and Terri that emerges in what they say about each other and what they think about this former boyfriend. Terri is indulgent with him and also understands that love may take some odd forms, while Mel pretends that love has only one definition and one manifestation, though he himself shows that this is not the case."
| |
|
Raymond Carver's " What We Talk About When We Talk About Love", 2000.
An examination of the characters' views on ideal and realistic love in this short story.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"In the short story "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" by Raymond Carver, the discussion of love and the nature and relationships of the four characters reflect the same issues, the same ideas, and the same difficulties. The discussion has the aura of something that is repeated over and over, as if these four talk about love often. They clearly know one another very well and know all about each other's loves, past and present, yet they still talk about them and their feelings endlessly, as if doing so enables them to understand those feelings and themselves.
The central question raised is what constitutes love, and this is raised in terms of how certain actions and behaviors might claim to be love but really cannot be. That, at least, is Mel's point of view when Terri talks about the man she lived with..."
| |
|
Oprah Winfrey, 2002.
A biography of the famous talk show host.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses famous talk show hostess Oprah Winfrey. The writer gives the reader a biographical sketch of the talk show queen's life and details her climb to success. In addition the differences between Oprah and other talk shows is discussed.
| |
|
The Audience in Mass Communication, 2002.
This paper examines the manner in which television has influenced people's lives in the past 50 years, focusing on the talk-show pop culture.
2,754 words (approx. 11.0 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 82.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A focus on the features of the popular television talk-show and how they influences their viewers. The paper describes how these shows often focus on outrageous topics and over-the-top guests and how some argue that daytime talk shows aim to sensationalize and exploit in order to draw an audience. It discusses how others argue that these shows provide a forum for true debate and expression, in which the audience is provided with valuable information. The paper tries to determine how talk shows influence the viewing audience, and whether this influence is beneficial or detrimental.
From the Paper
"There are a few main features of the television talk show (Livingstone & Lunt, 1994). First, the guests and the audience share physical space, with the guests usually facing the audience. Second, the host wanders throughout the audience, often selecting those who get to ask a question or state their views. Third, each episode focuses on a certain topic of concern, often stimulated by current affairs. Fourth, the program consists of lively conversation expressing diverse views on a particular issue. Fifth, the flow of the program is determined not only by the host and production staff, but also by the audience contributions. Sixth, the contributions made by the audience seem to be emotionally significant, stemming from personal experience rather than objective fact. Seventh, talk shows are generally inexpensive to produce, low in production value, and are broadcast outside of primetime slots. Finally, talk shows are usually either live or recorded in real time prior to broadcasting, with little editing."
| |
|
Trash TV, 2003.
Analyzes talk shows and "reality" shows.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 7 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Analyzes the characteristics of talk shows and "reality" shows as programs that seek out the lowest common denominator, sordid topics, and sexual misconduct. Discusses the purpose of high ratings and advertising fees, the success of these shows, and TV viewers.
From the Paper
"Trash TV, which consists of talk shows such as those of
Jerry Springer and the "reality shows" such as Survivor and The Real World, has been characterized by Jim Impoco (1996) as consisting of programs that deliberately seek out the lowest common denominator..."
|
|
|
