“Lucy, you’ve got some ‘splaining to do!” Whether or not you watch re-runs of I Love Lucy, most likely you have heard this saying in your lifetime. It is famous, memorable and very applicable in everyday life, but it is also an example of how much television has changed in the last 50 years.
I Love Lucy portrays ’50s television very well, and its popularity portrays ’50s culture even better. This period of time was very conservative. So conservative, in fact, that husbands and wives were never seen sleeping in the same bed on television.
Fast-forward to today. Think about the television shows you look forward to every week. My guess is that many of you would say at least one of the following: Desperate Housewives, Grey’s Anatomy, ER, Law & Order or 24. These shows focus on the very subjects that shows like I Love Lucy tried to avoid: sex, scandal, gossip, violence, crime and immorality.
However, if sitcoms were the same today as they were 50 years ago, no one would watch them. Television has changed to accommodate the changes that have taken place in society, or at least, most of it has.
News, whether it is local or national, has not changed noticeably since its debut in the 1940s. Today’s society is full of dysfunction. Criminals roaming the streets, high school dropouts relying on welfare, and divorce rates skyrocketing are just a few examples.
In the 1950s, about 20 percent of marriages ended in divorce. Compare that with today’s pathetic statistic of 50 percent. Maybe the conservative programming of the ’50s had something to do with a more committed society, but maybe it was a genuine interest in what was going on in the world that kept people in line. This may be the case, but think of this next point instead. Television in the ’50s portrayed real life, whereas television today emphasizes extremes that do not typically portray average lifestyles but rather create lifestyles for viewers to follow.
Today, people are so far removed from the current affairs that Jay Leno has made it a running joke on The Tonight Show, by politely laughing at people’s inability to answer what people in the know would consider simple questions in a segment called “Jaywalking.”
In the 1950s, the majority of society watched wholesome sitcoms, had healthy, long-lasting relationships, left its doors unlocked at night without fear of burglary and was able to have an intelligent conversation about current affairs.
If you think the same holds true today, you are living in Opposite World. But who is responsible for the sad state of today’s society?
Politicians? No, that’s the coward’s way out of a problem.
Professors? No, I’ve been pretty rough on them lately. They deserve a break.
Journalists? Bingo.
Anyone who has taken a class in writing knows how powerful the press is. Watch the movie Newsies if you haven’t. Even though the press is one of the most powerful communication tools in the world, it has suffered some loss in the past decade or so.
With the emergence of online news, the majority of newspaper subscribers are those who do not own or know how to use computers — typically the elderly, who enjoy the stability and familiarity a newspaper affords them. But to younger generations, newspapers are a waste of time we don’t have to spare. We would much rather spend our tiny amount of free time each day immersed in mindless television that lets us escape our world than read a lengthy article just to get a few facts.
However, if newspapers changed to accommodate our busy lifestyles, we might make time for them. Changes such as shortening articles to make them more readable, formatting pages to be more appealing to the human eye and making them more functional could possibly attract curious readers. I would rather deal with peeling those obnoxious security stickers off DVD cases than having to open the paper to read the second half of a front-page news story.
Sitcoms have changed to engage and encourage viewers to put down the paper and tune in, but journalism has done nothing to stop it. As a result, many people relate more to backstabbing housewives and gossiping emergency room interns than real-world events taking place today.
Journalists have followed the same instruction manual for decades and have assumed people would just keep reading or watching. Unfortunately, they were wrong, and now a complete revamp may be the only solution.
