In February 2007, I was in New Zealand when Super Bowl XLI was played between the Chicago Bears and the Indianapolis Colts. At the time, I assumed that people all around the world would be tuning in to see this most important of U.S. rituals. After all, I reasoned, the U.S. was arguably the most powerful nation in the world--who wouldn't be interested in seeing the highlights of our favorite past time?
Due to the time difference, it was about noon Monday in Raglan, NZ (the day after the Super Bowl was actually played in the U.S.), when I tuned in with my friends, Toni and Steve. We were grad students together at the University of Illinois during the 1990s. Toni was a native New Zealander (a Kiwi), while Steve hailed from Virginia. I assumed that he would be excited to see the game--and might even feel nostalgic about participating in the familiar ritual of watching the Super Bowl. I assumed wrong. Admittedly, it was more than a little distracting to try to watch football when the temperature outside was in the high 70s, and the view from where we sat was like the one below (this photo shows Raglan, NZ where I stayed in 2007 and 2010).
As compelling as the Super Bowl might have been if I had been at home (i.e., the game featured the first two African American coaches), it was difficult to watch a game that was played under such sloppy conditions. Even though Steve was from the U.S., he said he would rather be watching cricket or rugby.
Needless to say, when I came across this article by Martin and Reeves (2001), it did not come as a total shock that "the whole world wasn't watching" the Super Bowl (p. 213). Keep in mind that this article was published before 9/11, so the reference to "the worst act of terrorism" (p. 213) visiting U.S. soil was about Oklahoma City--not the World Trade towers. Even before 9/11, Martin and Reeves were talking about the declining U.S. political hegemony. [note: if you are not familiar with hegemony, it is a word that basically means "dominance," and is typically used to refer to political dominance amongst nations. We have used this term in different contexts throughout the semester - e.g., when speaking about dominant forms of masculinity, or hegemonic masculinity].
One of the most surprising things I learned from this article was how different the size of the viewing audience is for American football, in comparison to other global sports. I would have guessed that the World Cup of soccer had more viewers but to read that an "estimated cumulative audience of 37 billion people" watched some of the 64 games that made up the tournament in 1998 was astounding to me! The U.S. estimates of just over 100 million who watched previous Super Bowls obviously pales by comparison. If the contrast in numbers caught me by surprise, I was even more astonished to discover that the Cricket and Rugby World Cups each claimed somewhere in the neighborhood of 2-2.5 billion viewers worldwide.
Here are some questions for you to consider in relation to this article. You may write multiple comments to address the questions below.
Questions:
1. Were you surprised to read about the size of the viewing audiences for the Super Bowl in comparison to other global sporting events? Do these findings make you think differently about U.S. 'solipsism?' If so, explain.
2. How do Martin and Reeves (2001) differentiate between TV I and TV II? How do these terms relate to "Fordism" and/or "post-Fordism?"
3. In this article, the authors refer to the 60-sec ad produced in 1984 for Super Bowl XVIII, that literally "revolutionized the way advertisers would approach the game" (p. 219). What was that ad and why was it so transformative? How important are the ads to your Super Bowl viewing experience?
1.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading this article, as it relates to two of my major areas of research: sport and advertising. I was not surprised to read about the size of viewing audiences for the Super Bowl. Growing up in Germany, the Super Bowl was not a big deal to me or my friends at all. American football is not very popular in Germany (and I think in Europe in general), so we did not care about the Super Bowl. Instead, soccer is the most popular sport in Germany, so we would often focus on the soccer tournaments like the World Cup or the Bundesliga. As I said in class before, the U.S. is a very egocentric country and American culture is very solipsistic. I am, thus, not surprised that many Americans think that the Super Bowl is the biggest sport event in the world. Please be aware that I say this with no value judgment (after all, I love this country!). I have started to watch the Super Bowl in Germany ever since I have been interested in living in the United States. However, like the article pointed out correctly, the viewing experience abroad is much different. I had get up at 2 a.m. to watch the broadcast, and I was not able to watch any of the commercials. Only when I came to the U.S. in 2012, I was able to see how big the Super Bowl actually is.
2.
ReplyDeleteMartin and Reeves (2001) describe TV I as “network era television” (p. 216). As such, it played a central role in the ideological promotion of the “ethic of consumption, naturalizing the nuclear family ideal, selling suburbanization, and sustaining cold war paranoia” (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 216). Martin and Reeves (2001) describe TV I as “one of the chief products and producers of Fordism” (p. 216), because television – like the assembly line invented by Henry Ford – was now seen as a means to produce mass culture that aimed to attract the largest audience possible (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 216). Televised professional football, in this context, signified “an almost pure expression of values associated with Fordism” (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 216), as it promoted the idea of division of labor, hierarchies of control, ownership, discipline, winning, conformity, and an ethic of competition (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 216).
“Post-fordist” TV II, on the other hand, emerged in the 1970s and incorporated cable, VCR, computer technologies, and satellite (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 217). It signalized a “shift from mass culture and its unifying influences to […] ‘cult culture’, a divisive system of taste distinctions that has figured prominently in supporting and masking the radical inequalities of our times by segmenting the audience into ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’” (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 217). By fragmenting the mass audience into niche markets, the television landscape appeared to be much more diverse (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 217).
3.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that really stood out to me in this article was Martin and Reeves’ argument that due to the prevalence of TV II, “the authority, permanence, and centrality of the Super Bowl’s championship spectacle has been undermined by an eclectic, ephemeral, and decentralized Super Bowl circus with multiple side shows” (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 219). The Macintosh commercial “1984” was so crucial in this context because it established the advertising commercials that were featured during the broadcast of the Super Bowl as one of the “side shows” mentioned above; this gave the sport event a carnivalesque character. The spot revolutionized advertisers’ approach to the game, because it made the Super Bowl a “showcase for innovative advertising and a time for strategic product introductions” (Martin & Reeves, 2001, p. 219). After the huge success of the “1984” commercial that framed Macintosh computers as humanity’s savior from the dangers of conformity (as described in George Orwell’s novel 1984), many other companies saw the immense potential of the advertising during the Super Bowl. They now spent more money and produced higher quality products.
Today, the Super Bowl would not be the same without the commercials (or the halftime show). As a scholar interested in sports and advertising separately, I like watching the Super Bowl both because of the actual game and because of the commercials. However, I do think that it is the commercials that make the event more appealing to audiences who are not as interested in sport.
1. I am not so surprised about the larger viewership of the FIFA World Cup (soccer) over the Super Bowl, or even so much of the Rugby World Cup being a more viewed event. I am, however, very surprised that the Cricket World Cup and the Grey Cup are more viewed than the Super Bowl. In my mind, I didn't think that either event would garner the international attention necessary to eclipse the viewership numbers of the Super Bowl. I do think the this realization also draws my attention to solipsism in the US, specifically because I myself fell victim to this. I failed to realize that some of the largest sporting events in the world could possibly be larger than the Super Bowl.
ReplyDeleteBrandon Silva
ReplyDelete1. I was only slightly surprised by the size of the viewing audiences of the Super Bowl. Being a soccer fan, I had known that the World Cup and even the Euro were far more prominent in World Sports than the Super Bowl. However, I think that U.S. solipsism makes it is easy for Americans to believe that the Super Bowl is more than it is because in America, the Super Bowl is everything. Our coverage of events in sports outside of the country is minute and when it comes to the most popular game within the most popular sport, the media runs constant coverage making it seem that sport doesn’t exist outside of the U.S. These findings only reinforce my notion of American solipsism, that for better or for worse, the majority of what is given attention in America takes place within the United States.
2. TV I refers to the idea of network television that is dominated by promoting and consuming predominately in the 1960’s. It relates to ‘Fordism’ in that TV 1 drove the economy through ideas associated with Henry Ford such as assembly-line production and mass consumption. This system is designed to impact large audiences and the Super Bowl was one avenue the TV I era exploited due to the Super Bowl likeness to the ‘Fordism’. TV II took place from 1970s-1990s. It still operates on the principles set by the TV I era but it adds technological developments such as satellite, cable, VCR and personal computers. The TV II and ‘post-Fordism’ era moved away from the traditional values held in ‘Fordism’. The TV II began to market to wider populations, rather than the predominant hegemonic male audience of the TV I era. The marketing became smarter and more focus was placed about the quality of production rather than the quantity.
3. The ad the authors were referring was from Apple. It was directed by a big-time British movie director and cost nearly three times the amount of a regular 30-second ad in that time. The ad labeled Macintosh as Apple’s next big unveiling claiming that it would change the world. It was transformative in that it was one of the first ads to use the Super Bowl as a mega-platform to plant something revolutionary (like the Macintosh). I would not consider myself to be one of the people who only watch the Super Bowl for their ads but I will admit I am not as annoyed when the game takes a commercial break. It is interesting to see what the most creative and expensive minds are able to produce. As Apple led the way, companies understand the Super Bowl is the greatest platform to reach the largest audience, so their ad must be good. This definitely ads some entertainment value to the game and it also contributes to the ‘carnivalistic’ atmosphere of the Super Bowl as described by the authors.
Before reading the article about the Super Bowl I would admit that I always thought that it was the most viewed sporting event in the world. However, I always pegged soccer as a close second. I think American’s, minus its growing popularity now, always had the lowest interest in soccer but the rest of the world was “obsessed”. I think Americans are very consumed in its own sports and just like Dr. Spencer stated, the U.S. is deemed to be the most powerful nation why wouldn’t football be popular. This article didn’t really change my mind set on U.S. solipsism because the U.S. is, to me, completely consumed in its self.
ReplyDeleteThey defined TV 1 as being the equivalent of a car manufacturing company. Meaning that what was available was pretty cut and dry and each TV network had its job and that’s what it did. TV II is more mainstream media and is made up of satellite TV, Netflix, and electronics. TV I is Fordism because it is the idea of each person has a job, each station provides news, sports, or game shows. TVII is the post-Fordism. For example, car industries now have most of its operations done by robots; TV II is mainstream media made up of high technology.
The ad was Apple and how Macintosh was going to be released to compete with IBM. The thing I find to be most transformative is the amount of money Apple paid to run the commercial. At the time it was a lot of money but compared to what is paid now it would be pocket change. I think its nuts what the companies pay to get an advertise spot during the Super Bowl, but I do admit that of the last five Super Bowls I have watched the advertisements have been the most interesting to me.
2. TV II is described as television that was beyond the major 3 (now 4) broadcasting networks, and included "cult-hit" shows like Survivor and Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? TV II is considered "post-Fordism" because its shows weren't seen as shows created to reach as many viewers as possible in a similar manner. The shows of TV II were more identifiable shows, each with its own viewership. Where Fordism/TV I shows were shown on one of three major networks, TV II gave viewers options to pick from a wider selection of shows they chose as their favorites and not "whatever is on NBC".
ReplyDelete3. The 1984 Super Bowl ad referenced in the article is the ad that introduced the Apple Macintosh computer to the open-market. The ad placement cost Apple $400,000, 4 times the normal going rate for a 60-second spot at the time. It was also "visually-compelling" and included a popular actor as its narrator. These facets of the ad both were major changes from the norm of Super Bowl ads at the time, and would be a guide for future advertising campaigns.
ReplyDeleteThe ads in the Super Bowl were originally a major part of my enjoyment of the game, but as my passion for the sport has grown and as the quality (in my opinion) of the commercials has gone down, the ads have become less important of a factor in my satisfaction of watching the Super Bowl each year.
Ryan Viselli
ReplyDelete1. I wasn’t very surprised by the viewing audiences of the Super Bowl. I grown up playing soccer, so I knew how big the game was around the world and knew that most people in other places cared about soccer more. In addition, the super bowl comes on at 8pm, which is 2am in Europe and most of the people would be in bed and not stay up and watch it. Football isn’t very big around the world and there aren’t many pro leagues except for in North America. These findings didn’t make me think any different of U.S. solipsism because growing up it was evident that the majority of the Americans that I encountered really only knew about what was going on in America. I don’t think that Americans are naive to the fact that there are other important issues around the world. I believe the media has a lot of influence of what Americans see and most of the coverage is about what is going on in the United States.
2. The difference between TV1 and TVII was that TV1 focused on promoting and consumption and maintaining the ideal of family in the United States. It related to Fordism because it was a product that represented the general prosperity of the post-war through expansive manufacturing and mass consumption (Martin and Reeves, 2001 p216). TVII took place at a time where information was becoming more available, which they coined the term “information highway” (Martin and Reeves, 2001 p217). There were more outlets such as VCR’s, satellites, cable and personal computers for communication and more products for the consumer to choose from. This related to post-Fordism as it steered away from Fordism as an assembly line and had more specialized products and jobs along with new informational technologies.
3. The ad that was aired during the 1984 super bowl was Apple’s Macintosh computer. It was so transformative because it used the Super Bowl as a showcase to innovative advertisement. Apple wanted to show their new product that would change the world in front of the largest audience on television. The ads are somewhat important to my viewing of the Super Bowl because it’s big companies showing their best innovative way of selling their product. The commercials are usually entertaining and talked about for a good amount of time after they aired (beer commercial that used the catch phrase “Was up”).
1. It really did not surprise me that other countries do not watch the Super Bowl. Soccer is the sport of choice for other countries to watch. Honestly, I have never even thought about other countries playing football, nonetheless watching an American football game. Many Americans may be shocked that other countries do not watch the Super Bowl which displays their solipsism and thinking the world revolves around the United States.
ReplyDelete2. TV I refers to the major three networks: NBC, ABC, and CBS. TV II refers to the “information superhighway” expansions of all types of media from DVD’s to TIVO to Netflix. Fordism is the idea of assembly lines and everyone must work together to get a job done. This concept relates to TV I by having a set manner in which things run, or only having a select way of receiving media. TV I is non-individualized. Post-Fordism relates to TV II by providing individualism and freedom of choices between many different options of TV programs. TV II allows individuals to decide what they want to watch and when and where they want to watch it.
3. The ad introduced in the 1984 Super Bowl was for an Apple Macintosh computer. Apple utilized the Super Bowl to introduce a new revolutionary product to a very large scale of viewers. I am one of those people that only watches the Super Bowl to see the commercials. I believe that the commercials played during the Super Bowl are one of companies’ greatest opportunities to capture the attention of nearly the entire nation, so those commercials had better be good.
I wasn't very surprised about the viewing audices of the Super Bowl. I think that we as a country for some reason believe that if it is important to the United States, it means it is important to the world. But the World Cup is important to the whole world, but isn't as important in the United States. For that reason, this article didn't change my mindset on U.S. solipsism.
ReplyDeleteTV1 is basically the method of major network television stations that overpowered television. It relates to Fordism because TV1 was an example of Henry Ford's assembly line for manufacturing. This mass production and mass consumption paved ways for the ecomony in the 1960's. TvII operates with technological developments and breakthroughs over the years. Some technology that is used today are cable boxes, dvd's, blu ray, dvr, and computers.
The ad in 1984 was the introduction of Macintosh by Apple. This ad showcased the innovation of Apple to unveil their next big product and claim that it would change the world. It claimed that 1984 wouldn't be like 1984. Apple used this advertisement to reach the millions of viewers and forever changed how Super Bowl ads would be done. The amount of money they spent for that ad was insane back then. I still think it is insane that they pay so much for such little time. But they usually do a great job by grabbing my attention and keeping me from changing the channel just because a commercial is on.
Mike Harrington
1. Were you surprised to read about the size of the viewing audiences for the Super Bowl in comparison to other global sporting events? Do these findings make you think differently about U.S. 'solipsism?' If so, explain.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest I would have been very surprised because I started taking classes here for my Master's degree. The reason being is that I did not think of sport in a international aspect. i was narrow minded when it came to sport when I was in undergrad. As a criminal justice and sociology major I was not familiar to discussing sport in an educational context. My school offered a sport and society class but I was not able to fit it in my schedule throughout my four years at Caldwell. However, now I am not surprised that the Super bowl is not the most viewed sporting event in the world but the numbers of 37 billion compared to 100 million shock me. It is very difficult to wrap my head around the sheer size of 100 million let alone 37 billion.
Now I am able to see America for the truly isolated power it is. While our power is decreasing America is still a national powerhouse but it is humbling to realize that the whole world is not revolving around our favorite past times.
2. How do Martin and Reeves (2001) differentiate between TV I and TV II? How do these terms relate to "Fordism" and/or "post-Fordism?"
TV I is the mass media cultured TV. There were three channels and they were used as news outlets surrounding the Cold War. TV II moves to the cult culture. Three channels grows and now each individual person can find a program they enjoy. TV I relates to fordism. the idea of an assembly line and each channel doing its job to make the well oiled "machine work" It is a time of american ideals of the nuclear family and hard work. TV II is post-fordism, this leads us to the current times with technology advancing and individualism becoming a main concern.
3. In this article, the authors refer to the 60-sec ad produced in 1984 for Super Bowl XVIII, that literally "revolutionized the way advertisers would approach the game" (p. 219). What was that ad and why was it so transformative? How important are the ads to your Super Bowl viewing experience?
The ad that is mentioned is for Apple and it was used to introduce the Mac. It is transformative because it showed how ads can be used to capture large audiences for a short amount of time. Creativity was needed and now ads and commercials have become a huge part of the Super Bowl. Large amounts of money is paid for little space. However, if executed properly those 60 seconds will be talked about by millions of people for the upcoming days or weeks or years.
Maddy Amon
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNick Czurylo
ReplyDelete1. I was not surprised at the statistics, since I know that American football is not the most popular sport in the world. However, I can understand how the majority of Americans would think that it is the center of everyone’s attention since every single media outlet in American would like you to believe it is the world’s Super Bowl.
2. TV I is the three-network design that essentially promoted Fordism to the American people. Similar to an assembly-line, each worker, in this case channel, had its own job and/or purpose to serve. On the other hand, TV II, emerging in the 80s and 90s, was the information superhighway. During this time, “cable, VCR, and personal computer technologies” were used (Martin and Reeves, 2001, p. 217). It represented a change to “lifestyle sectors and niche markets” within television and gave “way to more flexible programming and scheduling strategies devoted to generating ‘quality demographics’” (Martin and Reeves, 2001, p. 217).
3. The ad that Martin and Reeves (2001) refer to is the Ridley Scott-directed Apple Computer 20-sec advertisement that introduced the Macintosh. It marked a turning point in which advertisers realized how the Super Bowl could be used as a marketing vehicle like nothing else in America at the time. Advertising rights along with airtime cost skyrocketed and still does to this day. For me, I was never really into the Super Bowl unless the Chicago Bears were in it. I mostly watch for the commercial, but it is actually more convenient for me to watch all the commercials that day after on the internet than it is to watch the whole thing live.
This is just a general response to our class discussion regarding the Super Bowl. As someone who is interested in popular culture and media, I only watch the game for the advertisements. One lesson that I teach in my Intro to Popular Culture class is titled “leisure and consumption.” In order to explain leisure and consumption, I focus my lesson around the Super Bowl. We usually discuss how the Super Bowl influences the economy (an insane amount of food and drink are sold—close to 50,000,000 cases of beer alone!) and also how to analyze the Super Bowl ads, considering their representations of identities and also how the commercial being aired during the Super Bowl might significantly increase the sales of a product. Given this fact, I show the Super Bowl XLV commercial involving Volkswagen’s Passat (see link below for commercial). In the 2012 commercial, a young boy is dressed in costume as Star Wars’ Darth Vader. The child, who is in full costume, walks around the house trying to control household objects (including the family’s golden retriever) with his special Darth Vader powers. After a number of failed attempts, the boy’s father returns home from work in his Volkswagen Passat. The boy tries to control the Passat with his powers, and then, the father, unbeknownst to the boy, starts the car with the remote control car starter. The boy is shocked by his special powers. As far as I remember, I believe that this commercial, which was aired during the Super Bowl, increased sales for Volkswagen by over 100 percent.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja3Rg0N1BWo
I was not surprised to read about the viewing audiences. Although I am not a fan of the world cups for Rugby or Soccer, I love the Olympics, which also generally has more viewership than the Super Bowl (the Summer Olympics more specifically). It does not surprise me, however, that many Americans would think that everyone watches the Super Bowl because it is such a huge part of our culture, achieving almost a holiday status.
ReplyDeleteMartin and Reeves differentiate between TV I and TV II by the type and number of stations as well as the television viewing experience. TV I exemplifies the idea of Fordism and the assembly line. Each network had one function and did not stray outside that function. TV II denotes the change from a few stations with a monopoly on one function to the idea of cable and satellite TV, where you can get specialty networks, or a network with a little bit of everything.
The ad was for the Apple Macintosh Computer. It was transformative because it was a huge development in technology and it was a point at which advertising became hugely important to the Super Bowl experience. Personally, I don’t care for the Super Bowl or the ads. Some of the ads are funny, but they still play for days to weeks after the Super Bowl depending on the ad. I don’t feel any need to actually watch the Super Bowl for the ads, because I will eventually see them anyway, and if I don’t, they probably weren't worth watching anyway.
I was not surprised reading about the size of the viewing audiences. Much of this, however, is because I have never been a fan of professional football, and could care less about the Super Bowl.
ReplyDeleteMartin and Reeves (2001) found that “…an estimated 1.3 billion people watched the 1998 World Cup soccer final between Brazil and France,” but only 800 million people were predicted to watch the Super Bowl in the year 2000 (p. 234). The question they followed up with asking if anyone remembered the score really struck me. Although the point of that question reflected the jokes made in regards to the low-scoring in soccer, my thoughts went a different direction.
If the United States would have made it to the World Cup, the number of viewers not only would have been even higher, but there is a significantly higher chance U.S. citizens would have remembered the score. The reason? The USA was not in the World Cup finals; therefore, what more reason to watch, right? Martin and Reeves (2001) comment on that an American football fan will typically “…dismiss soccer as a sport that does not matter,” because they find it boring; however, when the USA was doing well in the World Cup this past summer, my Twitter feed was flooded with “avid” USA soccer supporters who are those individuals the researchers described. It definitely confirms the idea of U.S. ‘solipsism.’ Unless the United States is participating in an event, it is as if the event isn’t taking place, or isn’t important.
2. Martin and Reeves (2001) describe TV I as consisting of television shows that essentially reinforce social norms, military propaganda, and pushing the stereotypical “American Dream.” This relates to “Fordism,” because Henry Ford pushed for assembly-line production/mass consumption. The idea of “Fordism” and TV I are similar, because by participating in Ford’s economic order, it’s as if that is the recipe to follow in order to achieve what is portrayed in TV I (“The American Dream”).
ReplyDeleteTV II and “post-Fordism” are different than TV I/”Fordism.” TV II has become much more advanced than TV I in terms of types of television along with forms (i.e., satellite/cable). “Post-Fordism” is similar, because it develops and progresses with TV II. This includes the differentiation in genders within the work place, and gender roles being disruption within television. “The American Dream” no longer has a set recipe to follow, but many.
Brittany Sinclair
ReplyDeleteI was not surprised about the viewing audiences for the sports. Although the Super Bowl is watched globally, I think that it is more of an American tradition and we take it way more seriously than other places around the world. Granted, it is one of the most popular sporting events to watch in America, but it’s just that. Other sports like soccer and rugby are more worldwide loved sports that our very popular in more countries around the world. They may not be the most popular sports in America, but globally, more people watch and pay attention to these sports.
2. They differentiated TV I and TV II in many ways. TV I is more of the basic television with just a few channels. TV II is your digital TV, antennas, etc, to produce more channels. TV I related to Fordism through the idea of an assembly line. In an assembly line, each person has one job and one job only and that was the same case with TV I. TV II was more advanced, more channels and viewing experiences. Post Fordism was the same way, straying away from assembly line ideas.
The ad was an advertisement for Macintosh. It was so transformative because it was the beginning to a new age and turn in technology. The world was being introduced to technology, as it never was before. I personally enjoy the ads, I think during the super bowl I pay more attention to commercials more so than any other day and I learn about new things and new products.
1. Like the majority of us I was not surprised at all in the size difference between the Super Bowl and other global sporting events. I think our society is very egocentric and we think that we are the dominant culture for all things. We only focus on sporting events that occur in the US so it was not really surprising for the United States to consider their sports the world’s game. I do not think that this article made me think differently about U.S. solipsism because I was already pretty aware that we think all of our sporting events are the most important. I think this article just reiterates this for me.
ReplyDelete2. TV 1 is the original era of television; they referred to it as network era television. The times when there were 3 channels, programs were marketed towards the nuclear family, and suburbanization. TV 2 is when the age of information and consumption change through television. We see this in cult classic television. People identify with their shows and programs are marketed at multiple groups. Technology played a huge role TV 2. Fordism is related to TV 1; the idea of the assembly line, every person has his or her role in society. Post-Fordism is associated with TV 2; there was more diversity, people are split into more groups and television became marketed towards groups.
3. The ad that they were referring to was an Apple ad. It was transformative because they did what no one else has ever done before when it came to advertisements. They spent more money than anyone has ever done previously and this ad set the standards for commercials during sporting events. Personally, I am not that interested in the commercials. I think they can be funny, but also I think that it has gotten to a point where they have just become annoying. I would rather it be more about the game than who can be the funniest.