I CAN RELATE:

FIFTH YEAR, MILLENNIAL AUDIENCES AND THE NEW

by

Victoria Wiley

Bachelor of Arts, Media, Information & Technoculture

University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada, 2018

A Major Project and Research Paper

Presented to Ryerson University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts in the program of Media Production

Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2019

© Victoria Wiley, 2019

AUTHOR'S DECLARATION FOR ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF A MRP

I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this MRP. This is a true copy of the MRP, including any required final revisions.

I authorize Ryerson University to lend this MRP to other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research.

I further authorize Ryerson University to reproduce this MRP by photocopying or by other means, in total or in part, at the request of other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research.

I understand that my MRP may be made electronically available to the public.

ii

Abstract

In this paper, I discuss audience responses to four popular geared towards millennials: The Bold Type, Master of None, Insecure and Please Like Me. As the millennial generation comes of age as producers and consumers of content, they are defining a new era of sitcom television. I build on existing research on the sitcom genre as well as characteristics of the millennial generation in order to explore how the two connect. Using Carolyn Michelle’s “Modes of Reception”, this research analyzes how millennial audiences perceive and interpret sitcoms. I discuss key characteristics that elevate the impact of a millennial series: the subversion of stereotypes, the portrayal of a cultural phenomenon and humor that encourages viewers to “laugh with” the characters. I find that these elements are best suited to the referential mode of viewing, indicating that character relatability is fundamental to developing a sitcom series that will resonate with millennial viewers. Finally, I outline how the characteristics identified in this research shaped my creative project Fifth Year in terms of tone and structure.

iii

Acknowledgements

This project would not have been possible without the support of many individuals. I would first like to thank my supervisor, James Nadler, for taking on my project. Your guidance and feedback through many, many drafts and ideas made this project possible. To my second reader,

Charles Davis, thank you for lending your extensive research experience to my paper. Your insights provided a welcome road map as I formed my own research. I would like to thank all my professors and classmates whom I worked with over the last year. Our interactions guided my project in countless ways and inspired me to keep working. I could not imagine a warmer or more encouraging group of individuals to work with. A special thanks to my classmate, Victoria

Katarzyna Bajer, who was a sounding board and confidante in the final stages of our projects.

I’d like to thank my family for their endless support through this, at times challenging, experience. My family were the first, and remain the most faithful champions of my writing. I could not have completed this work without my parents words of reassurance and my brothers to keep me grounded when I felt overwhelmed. I owe much of this project to their patience and encouragement.

Finally, I’d like to thank my university roommates. Living and working among the six of you was the greatest lesson university could offer me. Through the fun, the sad and the all foolishness, you not only inspired this project but helped shape the person I am now. I am forever thankful for your loyal support of me as a person and as a writer. I wish every young woman had the opportunity to experience that same friendship and support.

iv

Dedication

To my university roommates: Kate, Margo, Hannah, Kaitlin, Bronwyn and Kate.

v

Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 1

Literature Review ...... 3

THE SITCOM GENRE ...... 3

Historical Context of the Sitcom ...... 4

Innovation in the Sitcom Genre ...... 6

The Role of the Cliché ...... 8

Critics And Legacy ...... 9

AUDIENCE ...... 11

Choice and Individuality ...... 12

Traditional Television Formats ...... 13

Primary Research ...... 16

METHODOLOGY ...... 16

DISCUSSION ...... 19

REFLECTION ON CREATIVE WORK ...... 27

Next Steps and Concluding Thoughts ...... 32

Works Cited ...... 33

vi

I Can Relate:

Fifth Year, Millennial Audiences and the New Sitcom

Introduction

Since the beginning of television-based sitcoms, creators and networks have competed for viewers. The competition changes in response to viewer preferences, technological advancements and industry shifts as new generations of television producers and viewers continuously reinvent the genre. Today, viewers are inundated with new content at an unprecedented rate (Adalian and

Fernandez para. 3). Audiences have network television, cable, premium cable and a multitude of

Over-The-Top (OTT) and streaming services. Beyond that, companies such as YouTube and

Facebook continue to expand the traditional notions of what constitutes television. However, across all platforms the goal remains to entertain and engage viewers. Thus, understanding new audiences and their view of sitcoms remains central to the creative process. This study aims to contribute to knowledge of the millennial generation as they come of age as creators and audiences of entertainment. Specifically how do millennials view and negotiate new sitcoms? Further, what does that reveal about the qualities of a successful sitcom?

In order to analyze these questions, this paper begins by addressing two areas of scholarship. The first concerns the sitcom genre and the North American television industry. While television dramas often feature subgenres such as sci-fi, crime or soap opera, sitcoms more often capture the everyday lives of their characters. Thus, there is a strong link between the history of sitcoms and cultural changes. I explore this link in order to understand how the millennial generation, and the content they produce, fit into the sitcom genre as well as alter it. The second area of scholarship is the millennial audience. As a generation, there are certain characteristics associated with millennials. Analyzing the most common characteristics offers potential insights

1

for understanding millennials as a television audience. Building on this context, this paper identifies and analyzes four TV series which are “by and for” millennials. The analysis employs user-written reviews from Rotten Tomato and IMDB in order to interpret how viewers engage with the series’. Carolyn Michelle’s “Modes of Reception” serves as a theoretical framework. The similarities and patterns identified in the reviews are analyzed based on Michelle’s four modes of reception in order to understand how viewers interpret and enjoy sitcoms. Finally, this paper reflects on how the insights can be used to create a successful series in the millennial era of television as demonstrated by my creative project Fifth Year. The Fifth Year project, including script and series outline, further demonstrates how the insights are a useful guideline for creative work relevant to millennial audiences.

2

Literature Review

THE SITCOM GENRE

To better understand the present and future of sitcoms, this paper begins by looking to the past. As the focus is scripted, half-hour sitcoms, it is useful to first establish the historical context of sitcoms by chronicling their development up to the early 2000’s. As Westengard and Barlow state in the introduction to their detailed history of sitcoms, “it is almost possible to pinpoint when an

American was born by simply asking what the most important sitcom of their childhood was” (xi).

While their paper specifically addressed American viewers, this paper includes Canadians and many international audiences as they are avid consumers of American content. The statement aptly encompasses just how deeply and collectively viewers are impacted by the television they watch.

Drawing on work from my previous paper “So You Want to Create a Hit Sitcom”, this section examines the existing academia relating to the history of seminal sitcoms and how they represent the generation of viewers for which they were created. Specifically, what is the relationship between storytelling and the current events of an era as they come together in the sitcom art form?

To analyze how each decade was represented (‘represented’ in terms of storyline and theme) by its respective sitcoms, a series from each decade was selected. The analysis begins with

I Love Lucy, a 1950s comedy following the lives of housewife Lucy Ricardo and her husband

Ricky Ricardo in New York City as he tries to make it in show business and she drives him crazy

(Arnaz and Oppenheimer). Next The Show (DVDS) in the chronicled the personal and professional life of TV writer Rob Petrie along with his wife Laura, son Ritchie and various co-workers at the fictional Alan Brady Show (Reiner). In the 1970s, The

Show (MTMS) depicted Mary Richards, a young woman who moves to Minneapolis and works at a low-rated news station after being jilted by her fiancée (Brooks and Burns). In the 1980s,

3

introduced Sam Malone, former Boston Red Sox pitcher and bar owner, along with a range of bar regulars and employees including his love interest, the somewhat snobby and recently dumped

Diane Chambers (Burrows, Charles and Charles). In the 1990’s , follows the lives of friends Rachael, Monica, Phoebe, Ross, Joey and Chandler, living in New York City and navigating the relationships and career decisions of their late twenties and early thirties (Crane and

Kauffman).

Historical Context of the Sitcom. Westengard and Barlow define a sitcom as a “half-hour comedy generally airing on a weekly basis with recurring cast and location” and date the origin of the word in relation to television to the 1950s (xii). While the sitcom existed radio, this analysis uses it exclusively in relation to television. In the 1950s there were only four U.S. national networks (Westengard and Barlow xii). With each passing decade, it becomes more difficult to name one show as the show of its decade as choice and volume of production increases.

In the 1950s, captured the focus of a mass audience along with the Honeymooners and the Goldberg’s. However, I Love Lucy, and Lucille Ball herself, had unprecedented influence:

“Outside of Charlie Chaplin and Walt Disney, no figure in the history of entertainment has had anything like Lucille Ball’s power or influence over the future of their media—or impact on

American culture in general” (Barlow 12). In the 1960s, during a time of political, social and cultural upheaval, television was characterized as trying “to keep the peace by soothing the wounds and by bridging the generation gap by pretending serious differences did not exist” (Dalton and

Linder 47). For its part, The Dick Van Dyke Show maintained marital values and domestic life while introducing work life into the sitcom genre. By the 1970s, the Mary Tyler Moore Show moved towards comedy that dealt directly with social issues and a general, “shift towards

4

relevance” (Worland and O’Leary 60). The MTMS however, did so in a more subtle way than contemporaries such as and the Jeffersons.

One of the defining issues for this audience was anxiety about the disappearing middle class and the rise of the ‘yuppie’, the “young, urban professionals” (Dalton and Linder 146). Dalton and Linder position Cheers as an answer to this fracturing of society: “The cultural clash between two factions within the baby-boom generation—the yuppies and those who still identified with the anti-materialism of the hippies—is a frequent thread running through the popular sitcom, Cheers”

(146). As cable television grew, the 1990s were perhaps the last decade of network television dominance in sitcoms. During this time, ’s impact on the sitcom genre was arguably more meaningful than that of Friends. However, the lasting cultural significance of Friends, despite loud critics, is of particular interest to this analysis. In their paper “Friends Reconsidered” Cobb et al. denote this cultural relevance by referencing the movie How to be Single, in which a character refers to another as ‘season-three-Ross’ (683). In this 2016 romantic comedy aimed at young millennials, Friends is referenced without using the title of the show.

There are clear distinctions between the setting and themes in I Love Lucy and the Dick

Van Dyke Show and the subsequent three series. Adulthood for twentysomethings and those in their early thirties no longer centered on domestic life after 1970 (Cherlin 852). The shift was partly advertiser driven. Networks noticed that the baby boomer generation was not watching TV and in particular did not watch domestic sitcoms (Kutulas 94). The baby boomer generation was born between 1946 and 1964, according to the Pew Research Centre (Dimock, para. 7). Born at the end of WWII, this generation “rejected their parents paths” and were “getting more education, marrying later, and having fewer children—they were attractive targets for advertisers; yet, their

5

rejection of traditional domesticity also meant they didn’t find family sitcoms compelling”

(Kutulas 94).

The move away from domestic life was accompanied by the growing popularity of the

‘chosen family’. In the MTMS, Cheers, and Friends, the roles of wife, kids and extended family were often filled by roommates, friends and co-workers. The episodes that best illustrate the chosen family trend are those that centered around holidays. For example, in Mary Tyler Moore

Show season one episode “Christmas and the Hard-Luck Kid II”, Mary is forced to spend the holiday working and enjoys the holiday with her work family. Both Cheers and Friends have

Thanksgiving episodes where the characters choose to spend the holiday together rather than with family (“Thanksgiving Orphans; “The One Where the Underdog Gets Away”). While the series did not coin the phrase, the popularity of “Friendsgiving” (thanksgiving spent with friends) is often attributed to the Friends thanksgiving episodes (Bakkila para. 2; Merriam-Webster para. 4). After the 1990s, the sheer volume of entertainment as well as the specialization of channels changed television viewing. By the end of the decade, shows like HBO’s were stealing audiences from network television.

Positioning each of the five shows among the historical period during which they emerged reveals trends in the sitcom genre. Theme and storytelling in sitcoms closely relates to key societal trends. However, this is just a small piece of what has changed in television. As is briefly mentioned above, technology has radically changed television as well, from color television, shooting and editing practices to SVOD services and binge-viewing. Building on the historical context of each series, a number of similarities exist amongst all five.

Innovation in the Sitcom Genre. Each show is remembered as innovative in some way. As

Barlow argues with I Love Lucy, Lucille Ball pioneered how comedy could work in TV format:

6

“her own originality lay primarily in transforming herself and the comedic material she had mastered, making it suitable for the small black-and-white screen.” (5). When creating the Dick

Van Dyke Show, described his innovation in the relationship between main characters

Rob and Laura. The marriage was meant to be a rejection of the “battle of the sexes/husband against wife” which was the sitcom trope he specifically identified with I Love Lucy (Finn 22).

Reiner’s comments indicate a cultural shift that was taking place at the time. In his paper “The

Deinstitutionalization of American Marriage”, scholar Andrew Cherlin notes that a shift began in the 1960s when “the roles of wives and husbands became more flexible and open to negotiation”

(852). The changing role of marriage and specifically the role of ‘wife’ becomes a thread in sitcom storylines. In the paper “Making it After All”, Susan Crozier identifies MTMS as “the most significant of the New Woman sitcoms to appear on US television in the 1960s and 1970s” (51).

The pilot episode opens to Mary driving alone to her new life. Later we see her in a job interview where her potential boss, Mr. Grant, asks about her religion, her marital status and does little to hide his dismay that she’s thirty and never married (“Love Is All Around” 00:07:31). In the interview scene, Mary is unapologetic, stands up for herself and ultimately gets the job, demonstrating why the series was associated with second wave feminism. It is clear that MTMS does not simply feature a working woman, but centers itself around the unique struggles and freedoms faced by single, working women in the 1970s (Crozier 52).

Keeping with Cherlin’s work, Cheers moved even further away from domestic life and even beyond the workplace. The setting and characters tapped into a reality many young adults experienced. Family and marriage were no longer the primary goal and their careers were not their lives (Katims 160). In a season one episode, Norm jokes about having spent eleven hours hanging out in the bar in one day, while Diane must explain to her mother why she’s still not married

7

(“Someone Single, Someone Blue” 00:10:14). This type of conversation demonstrates the structure of the characters’ lives, not around work or family but time spent at the bar.

Moving ahead a decade, Friends furthers the evolution that Cherlin outlined. As the main characters graduate from their late twenties into their thirties, they continue casual relationships as well as living with partners before marriage (Cherlin 850). This change contributed to the trend of intimate relationships becoming central to self-identity, as things such as class and religion lost cultural dominance (Cherlin 853). Arguably, Friends is exclusively about how intimate relationships shape identity. In the season one episode “The One with the Boobies” a psychologist describes the characters friendships as “co-dependent, emotionally stunted, sitting in your stupid coffee house… and you’re all like ‘oh, define me! Define me! Love me! I need love!’” (00:20:05).

While the character is mocking the friends, the dialogue aptly sums up a series in which the characters searched for love and a sense of self. It was decidedly not a domestic sitcom and it could not be argued as a workplace sitcom when it was unclear what some characters even did for a living. Friends provided a new template for what adulthood could look like.

The Role of the Cliché. In his paper dedicated to the legacy of I Love Lucy, Barlow identified that the series was a “unique blend of innovation and cliché” (3). Perhaps the cliché (or trope) provides a source of reassurance or comfort to the viewer to balance the boundary-pushing features of a new series. The cliché aspect of a sitcom appears to be as essential as the innovation.

The premiere of The Mary Tyler Moore Show in 1970 introduces Mary, on her own after a promised marriage falls apart (“Love Is All Around” 00:04:20). A decade later, Cheers begins with Diane Chambers, the beautiful, privileged damsel in distress getting dumped in Sam Malone’s bar (“” 00:20:30). A decade after that, Rachel Green appears in the

Friends coffee shop, as the runaway bride, the privileged girl on her own for the first time (“The

8

One Where Monica Gets a Roommate (Pilot)” 00:03:30). While clichés are often viewed negatively as a crutch in writing, they also speak to collective experiences or emotions. Writer

Leslie Jamison says of clichés: “They allow us to look outward, to recognize the ordinariness of our experience, to understand the resonances between our own lives and the lives of others. They privilege commonality over singular self-expression” (Galchen and Jamison par. 8). While there have been many sitcoms which captured more specific, of-the-moment experiences, perhaps the series’ that are most memorable are those which encompass a universal, or cliché, experience.

Critics And Legacy. Finally, the above series’ all experienced the phenomenon of shows

‘not aging well’ in some way. Likely, the specificity to the decade of its original airing makes each show more susceptible to appearing outdated and narrow-minded later. Returning to I Love Lucy,

Dalton and Linder note that, “television in the 1950s “dealt with” the tyranny of separate and unequal conditions, and the lack of opportunity for Blacks by not dealing with it at all, even though the Civil Rights Movement started to hit its stride by the middle of the decade” (15). Crozier similarly identifies how MTMS is criticized for its portrayal of femininity within the context of the women’s movement in the 1970s. I Love Lucy and The Dick Van Dyke Show are both criticized for the patriarchal representations of marriage (Dalton and Linder). Cheers has received the least critical re-assessment, however, it is not entirely absent from critiques, particularly relating to misogyny and consent (Brown).

In the paper titled “Diversity Times Three”, scholar Douglas Ishii discusses a recent trend in television deemed the “ effect” which, “slips between references to the political economy of the television industry and the legitimization of gay and lesbian inclusion through the seemingly apolitical appearance of the nuclear family — without explicit acknowledgment of either antinormative queerness or homophobia” (34). Referring to the series Modern Family as a

9

model, this effect refers to the ways the series is celebrated for its ‘modern’ and progressive representation of family life when in reality it does little to challenge the traditional heteronormative nuclear family. Instead, it fits queerness into the old model. Whether with an agenda or not, each show appeared to employ the ‘just progressive enough’ principle wherein the series was deemed innovative without alienating conservative viewers. The Cheers episode “The

Boys in the Bar” quite clearly illustrates the way the series walked this line. In the episode, Sam’s old roommate and best friend Tom comes out as gay. Sam’s shock and discomfort is evident in long scene where Diane pulls him aside to process the news. During the scene he notes that “I should have known, I remember sitting at a piano bar and he requested a showtune” and “guys should be guys, Diane” but is ultimately the hero for accepting Tom anyways (00:05:30; 00:09:23).

In an ideal world, all television would be inclusive and ahead of its time in terms of how it represents people of all genders, sexualities and races. However, television is a business and it is not as simple as putting something completely revolutionary on the screen. The power of Mary’s feminism came from the fact that she was in the mainstream (Kutulas 94). Arguing against critiquing a show’s lack of progressiveness, Dalton and Linder note that dismissing a show for its outdated content is reductive to sitcoms as a genre and television as a medium where the messages can be more complicated than initially interpreted. For instance, “Lucy might be confined to the domestic sphere, but she continues her madcap attempts at escape because she yearns for something more” (Dalton and Linder 22). Multi-level conceptualizations of sitcoms allows for recognition of a series’ impact on the genre without excusing its shortcomings. Furthermore, social change rarely occurs quickly. Each sitcom discussed above portrayed a new cultural, social or economic trend as it developed and potentially helped to further cement that change’s place in mainstream culture.

10

Changes in where and how viewers consume television make it difficult to predict the future of the ‘generation-defining sitcom.’ A part of this difficulty relates to an issue often referred to as ‘narrowcasting’ (Hunt; Kuipers; Waterman). With Narrowcasting, once “large national audiences were splintered into even smaller, specialized (and marginalized) audience segments” due to the rise of cable services followed by the rise of SVOD and other alternative TV viewing methods (Hunt 170). The arrival of Netflix, Hulu and Amazon (among others) has shifted the sitcom genre. Reflecting on sitcom history, it is easy to see the nuanced ways earlier shows tapped into key social trends and changes. Perhaps what elevates a series from regular sitcom to a genre- masterpiece is its ability to capture those trends as they are unfolding. In many ways, each series identified for viewers in real time and experience what would later become an almost stereotypical characteristic of life in that decade.

AUDIENCE

While the sitcom genre is important to this study, the intended audience is equally as central. It is important to consider what is known about millennials as an audience. This paper uses three questions, drawn from my paper “Investigating How Millennial Audiences Interact with

Television” to provide context: Who is the millennial generation? What is the style and substance of the content they consume? And why do they choose the content that they do? Depending on the source, the exact range that defines the millennial generation may differ. It begins as early as 1980 and ends as recently as 2002. Writing for the Pew Research Centre, Dimock includes those born between 1981 and 1996 in the millennial category (par. 5) while the Environics Institute indicates that millennials were born between 1980 and 1995 (1). This paper follows the Pew Research Centre timeframe, paying special attention to the younger millennials because they are more closely associated with the term “digital natives”. Broadly defined, a digital native is any person born after

11

the internet became a part of daily life and therefor never lived without it (Fisher and Ha 29). A number of characteristics are repeatedly associated with millennials across social, educational and employment fields. How do these characteristics shape millennials as a television audience?

Choice and Individuality. A common millennial characteristic is an increased desire for flexibility and choices compared to previous generations. In the viral Times Magazine article,

“Millennials: the Me Me Me Generation,” Joel Stein posits that the millennial tendency to want freedom and options comes from growing up in an era which offers an unprecedented amount of both. Netflix is an excellent example of how television has changed to meet this need. In a study on binge-watching habits, Raikar found that 85% of millennials (aged 19-25) preferred watching episodes back to back (51). In comparison, only 33% of participants over the age 69 preferred watching back to back episodes (Raikar 51). Furthering the divide, the same study found that 60% of millennials favored laptops/desktops to televisions as their preferred device to binge-watch on

(Raikar 52). The choice to consume content at their own rate is something millennials capitalize on and value. Further, several studies indicate that individuality is another characteristic highly valued by the millennial generation (Cox 186; Kotz 1164). A new trend in both the classroom and work place, millennials respond better when they are addressed and treated as individuals (Cox

186; Kotz 1164). Personalization and individuality are engrained in Netflix’s algorithm. The internet has provided unprecedented access to information, to choice. As the self-proclaimed inventors of “Internet television”, Netflix knows the offering user’s choice is of the utmost importance (Gomez-Uribe and Hunt 13-13.2).

Netflix goes beyond simply offering an extensive library of niche content. Equally as important is the individualized “complete Netflix experience” (Gomez-Uribe & Hunt, 2015, p.

13.2) in the form of the recommendation algorithms. Gomez-Uribe and Hunt detail the five main

12

algorithms dictating users homepages and demonstrate the comprehensive level of individualization. The personalized video ranker (PVR) algorithm, “orders the entire catalog of videos (or subsets selected by genre or other filtering) for each member profile in a personalized way” (Gomez-Uribe and Hunt 13.3). Each row of titles seen on Netflix, such as “horror movies”, was specifically selected for the individual viewer, including the title.

Traditional Television Formats. Whether they pay for cable, watch on a streaming service or another way, it is important to consider the type of content that interests millennials. A growing portion of that content shares a specific quality: it subverts a stereotype of culture assumption. For instance, in “Two Funerals and a Wedding”, Carol Siegel, identifies a theme in television shows where Jewish women are presented as being extremely sex positive and openly or even aggressively sexual (157). One of the shows she mentions is Broad City. The Comedy Central series explores sexuality and other serious issues from the perspective of two millennial women in a comedic, empowering and cheerful way (Siegel 158). In her analysis of the HBO series Girls,

Maria San Filippo notes that the series “examines and validates women’s bodies, desires, pleasures and voices through sexually explicit imagery” (29). In “Constructing a feminist icon through erotic friend fiction: millennial feminism on Bob’s Burgers”, Tully notes that the Bob’s Burgers character Tina embodies an optimism that is representative of both the millennial generation and millennial feminism in contrast to previous iterations: “millennials are defined by their optimism, sincerity, social progressiveness, and devotion to community” (195). The studies mentioned above demonstrate how open-mindedness and optimism as millennial characteristics shape the characters on-screen.

Another key feature of TV shows aimed at the millennial generation: relatability. For many series’ this means including awkward and/or embarrassing storylines. Havas and Sulimma identify

13

this method of storytelling as ‘cringe aesthetics’(Abstract). For Havas and Sulimma, cringeworthy scenes or storylines in primetime dramedies are moments that expose the character’s, “faults or their social environments' shortcomings as political issues, help establish links to "quality" television's aesthetic traditions, most conspicuously to its fascination with "complex" central characters” (7). Havas and Sulimma employ Girls, Insecure and as the main subjects of analysis. The authors selected these series’ as they all feature “millennial female protagonists who frequently violate social and physical taboos in embarrassing narrative situations, while also failing at communication, exhibiting unawareness of expected social behaviors, and having their self- images diverge from the ways others perceive them” (Havas and Sulimma 11). The tactic draws on experiences, personality traits and situations not typically portrayed on-screen due to their unpleasant nature both for the character and the viewer.

Prestige dramedies, comedy-drama hybrids considered to be high-culture, are increasing in popularity (Havas and Sulimma 2). The comedy aspect allows the shows to maintain a sense of optimism while the drama-side allows for storylines which explore a multitude of socio-political and cultural issues. Many popular ‘sitcoms’ today more closely resemble the prestige dramedy format. The emphasis on realism and incorporating identity issues is relatively new when compared with earlier successes such as Friends. While Friends remains an important cultural touchstone for millennials who continue to identify with the show (Cobb et al. Abstract) it is routinely critiqued for its overly simplified portrayals of young adulthood and its lack of complex identity representations (Wright; Woodward; Butler). These critiques can be found on millennial- oriented sites such as Vice, Buzzfeed and Glamour. Among other issues, new audiences find the treatment of ‘fat Monica’, Chandler’s transgender father, and the entirely straight, white main cast to be particularly offensive. While the laughs often came at the expense of cultural stereotypes on

14

Friends, in millennial dramedies such as Insecure, the main characters and their own faults are usually the source of humor.

In her paper, “What’s so funny? Audiences of women’s stand-up comedy and layered referential viewing” S. Katherine Cooper deems this distinction the difference between “laughing at” or “laughing with” the target of the joke (102). In her study on the audience reception of female comedians, Cooper found that audiences reacted differently depending on the identity of the joker and the identity of the target: “despite differences in determining the butt of the joke, focus group discussions reveal that most women and racial minority audience participants are more actively critical of “laughing-at” top-down humor” (105). Using the running joke of Chandler’s transgender father in Friends as an example, viewers easily identify the comedian as a straight, white male and the butt of the joke as a member of the LGBTQ minority causing a critical response.

A successful millennial era ‘sitcom’ demands a far more inclusive and nuanced approach to representing the lives of the generation, possibly relating back to an emphasis on community amongst millennials. The shows that appeal most to millennials do not lean too heavily into socio- political issues. Adversely, millennials will not respond to a show that appears ignorant of the important issues facing their generation or one that does not demonstrate progressive attitudes towards sex, sexuality and race. For my creative project Fifth Year, this means including diverse characters and storylines that reflect the multifaceted ways in which young adults interact and perceive sexuality and identity today. The desire for choice is frequently associated with millennials and is also a defining characteristics of modern television.. Emblematic of the social media era, connectivity and community are important to millennials in their viewing habits.

Finally, millennials are recognized as an open-minded generation and this has dictated the kind of millennial series which find success on traditional platforms.

15

Primary Research

METHODOLOGY

This paper analyzes four recent shows for and about millennials. The selected shows are

Master of None, the Bold Type, Insecure, and Please Like Me. These shows were selected based on their ability to meet several criteria. Initially, the google search “popular millennial shows”, was used to compile a large list of shows from a number of online articles (Elite Daily, Ranker,

Complex, Business Insider, Uproxx). Any show that was not a sitcom (here, the term is applied very generally, meaning any half-hour series with a comedic element) was then excluded from the list. Additionally, if a series was a sitcom but belonged to a specific genre (murder-mystery, sci- fi, superhero shows) it was also removed. From the shortened list, the above shows were selected because they feature multiple seasons and can be considered successful based on an online presence either in academic or cultural publications. Using Rotten Tomatos and IMDB, a total 348 reviews were collected. Where available, the 100 most recent reviews were selected for each show.

In the case of Please Like Me, only 48 reviews were available across both sites. This is possibly due to the fact that while it is popular amongst North American viewers (based on its presence on the aforementioned lists), it is an Australian production.

Master of None is a Netflix original series which premiered in 2015. Created by Aziz

Ansari and and starring Ansari, it follows the life and relationships of struggling New

York City actor Dev. There are two seasons to date over which it has won numerous awards including a Golden Globe and three Emmys. The Bold Type is a Freeform series which began airing in 2017. There are currently three seasons of the series, which centers on the lives of three best friends working for fashion magazine Scarlet in New York City (a fictional proxy for

Cosmopolitan Magazine, as the story is loosely based on a previous editors experience). Insecure

16

is an HBO series aired in 2016 and ran for three seasons. It focuses on the life and awkward experiences of Issa and her friends living in Los Angeles. Please Like Me is an Australian series which aired on ABC in Australia and Pivot (an American digital cable and satellite television channel). It is also available on Netflix. It began airing in 2013 and its fourth and final season aired in 2016. Please Like Me is about twentysomething Josh, who recently came out as gay, his relationships and his family life. Over the four seasons it explores a number of serious mental health issues.

Media scholar Carolyn Michelle developed an analytical framework that this paper employs in order to interpret and analyze the selected series’ and reviews. Michelle’s “Modes of

Reception” outlines four modes through which audiences consume and understand media texts.

Michelle posits that audience reception should be viewed on a spectrum ranging from close

(subjective) to distant (objective) modes of response (195). The first mode, transparent mode, is a close, subjective form of reception in which the reader experiences the text as life (Michelle 195).

Specifically, viewers experience text as an “unmediated reflection of “real life” or coherent fictional worlds of their own” (Michelle 199). In the next mode, referential mode, the viewer is slightly more removed from the viewing experience as they view the text as like life (Michelle

199). Here, rather than relating directly, the viewer draws comparisons and analogies between the fictional and real world:

In adopting this mode of reception, viewers are able to draw from three “pools” or sources of information, and may use this information to affirm, contest, or question the accuracy of textual depictions of people and events and the version of “reality” presented in a particular text. Such assessments are typically made according to a perceived fit, or lack of fit, with the viewer’s own cultural milieu and existing body of experiences, observations, and knowledges. (Michelle 199)

Thus, the referential mode is a more critical reception while still engaging with understanding the text as a version of reality. The mediated mode is a more distant, objective reception of media

17

texts, common among scholars and critics. Rather than viewing the text as tied to reality, the mediated mode recognizes the, “constructed nature of the text as a media production – as an elaboration of established media codes and conventions” (Michelle 203). This mode is focused on the quality of the form in a given media text. The final form of reception, discursive mode, also employs a more objective perception of the text however it is concerned with the content (Michelle

206). Michelle explains that “accounts primarily framed in this mode perceive that the text is attempting to communicate a particular message, and represent the viewer’s response to that message. This response has two elements: analytical and positional” (Michelle 206). As the names suggest, the analytical element is how the viewer identifies the message while the positional element is the viewers response to that message. A viewers position is categorized as either dominant/preferred, negotiated, or oppositional depending on the viewers stance (Michelle 206).

Lastly, a viewer can employ more than one mode when evaluating a show. Borrowing the term from Schrøder (1986), Michelle (2007) calls the process of shifting between modes commuting viewers (p. 213). In fact, viewers can quickly switch between modes as they evaluate and discuss a series. While it is possible and indeed not uncommon for users to engage in three or four modes in a longer review, this analysis focuses on identifying the one or two most dominant modes of reception.

Michelle’s framework provides a means to categorize and understand how viewers responded to each of the four shows. Specifically, what elements (in terms of form as well as content) did viewers value or dislike? To do so, each of the 348 reviews were assigned either one or two dominant modes. As Michelle indicates, the framework does not assume that there are only four distinct ways for viewers to receive and think about a media text, only that these four modes may be the predominate ways of doing so (213). For each show, the reviews were separated into

18

positive and negative reviews based on the rating assigned by the reviewer. Reviews from Rotten

Tomatoes were based on a 1-5 scale while IMDB used a 1-10 scale. In order to compare all reviews, the Rotten Tomatoes ratings were converted to a 1-10 scale. Thus the resulting analysis considers the overall frequency of each mode, the modes used in positive versus negative reviews, and the trends within each show.

DISCUSSION

In both positive and negative reviews, across all four shows, the mediated mode of reception was far and above the most frequently employed. It appeared either alone or in- conjunction with other modes in more than nearly 50% of the reviews. The high use of mediated- mode perspective may be due, at least in part, to the source of the reviews. IMDB and Rotten

Tomatoes are listed as an online film and television database and a review-aggregation website respectively. The informative nature of both sites may cause viewers to take a more critical approach to reviewing the show, perhaps mimicking the professional reviews also featured on both sites. Additionally, it is understandable that positive viewers would value and mention characteristics such as strong acting, writing and directing and the opposite would be true for negative viewers. It does not require in-depth analysis to conclude that viewers appreciate aesthetically pleasing and well-constructed texts.

Overall Use of Modes (alone and commuting)

Mediated Mode 230 uses Referential Mode 90 uses Discursive Mode 30 uses Transparent Mode 22 uses Figure 1. The overall use of each mode including times it was used independently and in- conjunction with another mode, across all reviews for the four shows.

19

An additional category was added to account for reviews which lacked the depth or information to analyze or categorize using Michelle’s framework. These were assigned the label

“Generic”. Given that there is no minimum word count for the reviews, some simply did not provide enough content. Across the four shows there were a total of 44 generic reviews. An example of a positive and negative generic review are listed below for the show Insecure:

“Awesome show! Love it!”

“Season 3 sucked. Period.”

While expressing an opinion on the series, in both cases it is not possible to determine from what perspective these reviewers were viewing and analyzing the series.

Thus, commuting reviews proved to be a more valuable source for analysis. Commuting responses were more common than reviews that only employed one mode. In positive reviews, for all four shows, the most frequently employed combination was mediated mode/referential mode.

For negative reviews, mediated mode/transparent mode appeared with equal frequency as the mediated/referential combination.

Commuting Viewers Mediated Mode + Referential Mode 47 uses Mediated Mode + Discursive Mode 14 uses Mediated Mode + Transparent Mode 10 uses Referential Mode + Discursive Mode 6 uses Referential Mode + Transparent Mode 1 use Figure 2. The most common combinations of modes employed by commuting viewers.

In the case of positive reviews, the referential mode was employed across the three categories of knowledge pools in order to verify the ‘realness’ of the show. These reviews frequently cited “real world millennial experiences” validated by the shows:

20

The Bold Type:

“As a millennial currently going into my first real career (backed by Bachelor's

Degree), I can relate to the pressure she feels to perform for her job, even if it means

being put into very uncomfortable situations. It's difficult to develop a new role

identity, especially being in your first 'real' job where expectations are set high… In

a job market that chews up & spits people out, I also need to decide if I should go for

my dream job, or do what's realistic. All in all, this series deals with real life issues

that career oriented millennials will at some point deal with.”

Master of None:

“This is definitely a show for millennials. My parents would not get nearly the value

out of it that I do. His observations and portrayals of contemporary social situations

are so on point.”

Insecure:

“As young women we can identify with every Character on the show, whether we

question our love life or career like Issa, wonder why we can't find the right

relationship like Molly, or why we're so absent yet committed like Lawrence. This

show is real life. The humor isn't for everyone, but as a minority I connected on all

levels and "got it"”

Please Like Me:

“You can tell they are in a real city, in a real house or flat, or hospital, or restaurant.

It adds to the immersion you feel with the characters and their story line. The tone of

the show has a unique voice, and a particular feel of reality as a millennial.”

21

The transparent mode was the least used in positive reviews, suggesting that these dramedies are not meant to be enjoyed as separate worlds but for their likeness to this world. In fact, many positive reviews cited the monotonous and low-key tone of the shows as part of the appeal.

Returning to Havas and Sulimma’s research, these comments demonstrate cringe tactics at work in millennial sitcoms (11). I previously identified how cringe tactics represent experiences, personality traits and situations often not seen on TV because of their uncomfortable nature. The

Bold Type reviewer above notes that she enjoys the series for its portrayal of unpleasant or stressful experiences because she can relate to it. The comments suggest that employing cringe tactics may be a useful technique for encouraging viewers to interpret a series through the referential mode.

By including storylines revolving around STD’s and internet privacy issues in the first episode of

Fifth Year, I hope to employ uncomfortable situations in order to make the characters appear real and relatable.

The majority of negative reviews did not employ a referential mode of reception.

Approaching the series more frequently from a transparent view, reviewers felt there was not enough “laugh out loud comedy” in the episodes. This may relate to the earlier discussion of prestige dramedies, a category all four series could be argued they fit into. Havas and Sulimma used Insecure as an example of cringe aesthetic and how the nature of comedy is shifting. The

Bold Type, Master of None and Please Like Me employ similar tactics wherein the shows approach serious matters while also using moments of comic relief. Viewers note that these moments however, are only funny for their likeness to real life:

Master of None:

22

“Master of None is a great show because it is about the most mundane of things. This

shows portrays Dev Shah as he is in 30s and still struggling to get his life together,

both professionally and romantically.”

“It's not laugh-out-loud hilarious, it's 'I can relate' soft chuckle material. It's 'wow-

that's so true' funny. It's heartwarming, it's sweet, it addresses real-life issues in

today's world. It's mellow, it's calm, it's relaxing, with just enough stressful situations

to keep you interested.”

A common thread throughout all four series is that the humor comes from the often mundane experience of a young person navigating adulthood. Each series seems to explore the same questions albeit from varying perspectives. The Freud quote, “love and work are the cornerstones of our humanness” aptly encompasses the root of each series. The characters in each series struggle with work and love, their failure to master either and thus failure to achieve “adulthood” generates both humor and emotion. Conversely, the exact qualities that make the show appealing to some or detractors for other viewers:

“The series is incredibly bland. I do not understand the appeal of this show. Its just

not funny. at all.”

This theme was present across each show, demonstrating that a referential perspective was an important piece for understanding and enjoying the show for many viewers. It also says something about the changing nature of sitcoms and comedy tastes. As was demonstrated in the historical development of sitcoms discussed in the first section, a shift to “focusing on the real” took place in the 70s. These new iterations, while still meeting many of the structural elements of a sitcom, have greatly expanded the genre. Many of the changes are reflective of millennial characteristics.

For instance, they are identified as an open-minded generation. A stark contrast to the Friends-era,

23

each of the series includes diverse characters in terms of race and sexual orientation in leading or prominent roles. For Fifth Year, this involves emphasizing the “laughing with” humor outlined by

Cooper wherein the main characters are both the comedian and the target and the humor is derived from their own experience. Furthermore, Cooper’s work influenced my role as the writer for Fifth

Year, particularly in terms of racial diversity. Rather than attempt to write the characters and their experiences from perspectives other than my own, I believe the characters will require further input from diverse writers in order to authentically represent specific experiences. Thus I provide no indication of the race of any characters in the pilot or series bible. An example of this exists in

Master of None. The character Denise is black and queer, details that were not in the script until

Lena Waithe was cast and lent her own personality and experience to the role which then became central to the character (Falcone para. 3). In many referential and discursive mode reviews, this is integral to the realness and value of the show:

The Bold Type:

“THIS is the kind of representation and empowerment I've been looking for in

media.”

Furthermore, each show touches on a major theme in millennial era adulthood. Specifically, how do people know they’ve reached adulthood without any of the traditional benchmarks. In the article

“Outsourcing Adulthood”, author Maureen O’Connor discusses the societal trends which have all but erased these benchmarks. Beyond marriage and homeownership (which are happening later, if at all), even what constitutes a career has shifted. O’Connor notes that in the ‘gig economy’ freelance work and multiple career shifts are the new norm (par. 6). Dev in Master of None engages with this as he moves from job to job, looking for acting work. Additionally, many millennials desire fulfillment out of their work, such as the character Issa in Insecure. These issues make a

24

stable career less likely, especially at a young age. O’Connor goes on to point to smaller changes that make young adults feel like they are not really reaching adulthood, such as the fact that anything can be ordered on an app now, removing the need for traditionally “adult” chores such as grocery shopping (para. 1). In many of the positive reviews, most in the referential mode, viewers were very receptive to the way the shows portrayed this phenomenon. It was also identified as the major source of humor.

Master of None:

“I cannot say enough good things about this show. It is just so great. The coming of

age, the dating in your late 20s/30s, the use of dating apps, trying to live up to your

parents expectations, maintaining friends/relationships, ending relationships,

religion, and careers.”

“This is a funny show. And a heart-warming one about love. And one that talks about

serious issues about race and immigration. It tells a story of love, companionship, and

the lack of identity that plagues people in their twenties.”

Translating the adulthood theme to Fifth Year, the characters are at the very beginning of this coming of age, identity struggle. The end of university, when students are meant to transition into well-rounded, contributing members of society, seemed like an interesting time to explore this phenomenon as almost a precursor to the other series’ in this research.

The discursive mode of reception appeared most frequently in reviews for the Bold Type.

Both positive and negative reviews cited the feminist and liberal messaging in the show. As

Michelle explains, the discursive mode is most easily employed by those who readily have a theoretical framework available (211). Thus, if a show is perceived as overtly employing a feminist/liberal framework, it generated mostly negative reactions:

25

“The whole show is all about trying to sway everyone towards the liberal agenda. If

any of the characters have a view that doesn't follow the liberal agenda, by the end of

the episode without any good persuasion, they change their minds and follow the

crowd. The characters all have to agree on everything or there is drama until the

person whose view isn't liberal follows the crowd. The point of the writers and

producers is total mind control so people will turn towards the liberal agenda instead

of having a mind of your own.”

A mediated-discursive mode of reception was the most common amongst negative reviews, whereas the discursive mode was employed much less frequently in positive the Bold Type reviews. Even in positive reviews, the overt messaging was a common critique. In each of the other three series, reviewers identified socio-political messaging however it was perceived as more subtle. As such, it was received as either mediated-intention on the part of the directors/creator or through a referential view as part of the real world. While it is inevitable that some viewers will disagree, instances were recorded where viewers personally rejected the message but still enjoyed the show to some extent:

Master of None:

“This show has great aspects of good rom coms but skirts the line of being a show to

push a politicial agenda, the episodes switch between being funny then being episode

pushing a progressive movement. They do not even make it suttle putting in these

messages which made me feel like I was watching an informative video in a classroom

or something. Overall it can be funny, but not my favorite.”

This suggests that a show can benefit from including socio-political messages however, viewers disengage when the messaging is perceived as unnatural to the storyline or themes.

26

In an ideal world, the universality of the themes means that a sitcom can be enjoyed by a wide-range of viewers for quality of storytelling while the specificity of the stories are enjoyed and resonate especially with its intended audience. However, the television landscape has changed a great deal since the days of a handful of major networks. Viewers get their content from an ever- growing pool of channels and platforms. With so much content, it is quite possible that mass appeal is no longer the main goal. The four series analyzed here are indicative of that. Those who gave the most positive reviews of the surveyed sitcoms approached the show from the perspective of their own personal or world knowledge. The series were well-received by viewers who related, and disliked by those who did not, with a middle ground of viewers who may not relate but appreciate the quality.

Based on the above analysis, this paper proposes that there are three critical success factors for millennial sitcoms that are most valued by viewers. First, the humor the audiences appreciated was more nuanced than a gag or call back line. The tone of humor in these “comedies” is not silly and is rarely mean or at the expensive of anyone except for a main character being self-deprecating.

The second critical success factor is that the series must be perceived as rooted in reality and thus relatable. This is demonstrated by the common use of the referential mode in positive reviews, viewers draw enjoyment from relating to the experience as similar to the real world. The final success factor is that the shows have an ideological stream or in other words, a stance or perspective on a current cultural trend or issue.

REFLECTION ON CREATIVE WORK

The creation of the Fifth Year sitcom and series bible reflected the research explored above.

The research conducted was ultimately a creative practice, leading to the critical success factors that helped guide the creation of the series. The secondary research and analysis of primary results

27

greatly informed my own creative project as part of my thesis work. My original goal for the creative side of this project was to create an original scripted series outline and pilot episode. The show was originally an hour long drama about university students. My research began with two research papers conducted as part of my coursework. The first, “Who What When Where Why:

Investigating How Millennial Audiences Interact with Television” was concerned with millennial audiences and how they are viewing and shaping television. It specifically focused on scripted television and the key conclusions I drew from this research are included in the literature review.

The second paper, “So You Want to Create a Hit Sitcom: Analyzing the History of Sitcom

Success” focused on the historical context and is also featured in the literature review.

My research on the millennial audience informed some of the initial changes to the creative work. It was at least partly responsible for the switch from drama to a half hour sitcom format. My research revealed how the idea of “sitcom” is changing. Prestige, half hour (even this is changing due to less restrictions on exact time with platforms such as HBO and Netflix) dramedies incorporate the blend of comedy and drama I intended to include in my project. In many ways, they have replaced what may traditionally be considered a “sitcom”. Even shows such as Broad

City, a Comedy Central series which was considered for this study and which adheres to a more traditional idea of a half hour comedy, deals with more serious subject matter than previous generations might have. I found in my research that the characteristics of millennial audiences (my primary intended audience) aligned themselves well with the comedy/drama hybrid. My research on the sitcom genre reinforced my decision and solidified my goal for the tone of the project.

Specifically, the genre is constantly evolving with each generation of television shows. Each series

I analyzed featured commentary on societal trends at the time. While I explored various situational and specific narratives for my own project, such as a student making a documentary about their

28

classmates lives, I ultimately concluded that I was more interested in exploring the life experience of characters at a specific point in time, tied to life in the real world. This decision was inspired by the theme I identified in the four series I analyzed for this paper.

The popular millennial series’ in this study shared a number of similarities and with the work I am doing. They ultimately served as inspiration in terms of theme, characterization and structure. The shows were largely not interpreted in the transparent mode, particularly by positive reviewers. This indicates the importance of keeping the themes and storylines in the “real world”.

While series may invite the viewer to suspend disbelief using the transparent mode (Michelle uses the example of soap operas), the viewers in this study did not tend towards doing so. Elements of the sitcoms which required suspension of belief (such as the unlikely ways everything works out for the Bold Type characters) were perceived as the sitcoms failure to accurately portray reality.

Thus, in creating my own series, I emphasized realism over adding elements that may have been more dramatic or comedic but strayed further from real life experience.

My research supported the decision in a number of ways. Returning again to Havas and

Sulimma, they listed “millennial female protagonists who frequently violate social and physical taboos in embarrassing narrative situations, while also failing at communication, exhibiting unawareness of expected social behaviors, and having their self-images diverge from the ways others perceive them” (Havas and Sulimma 11) as qualities found in millennial prestige dramadies.

Specific to the show’s in this research, the ‘cringe-worthy’ experiences centered around the character’s struggle to act like adults as a source of humor and emotion. The struggle for adulthood appears to be a cultural phenomenon for millennials. I then identified a link between these qualities and positive, referential reviews. While reviewers noted that it was not a source of laugh-out-loud humor, this was framed positively. Furthermore, the violation of social taboos or cultural

29

assumption is one of the key qualities associated with successful sitcoms in the literature review.

Ultimately, this links the qualities of successful sitcoms and the characteristics of the millennial generation with the referential viewing mode.

These links helped to guide specific decisions for Fifth Year. In the pilot, the characters

Kaya and Lana both experience embarrassing or traumatic situations that are certainly ‘cringe- worthy’. A viewer need not have experienced telling a partner about an STD to relate to the embarrassment of not wanting to share something with a crush. Kaya’s story introduces an important theme in Fifth Year: how internet, smart phones and social media have changed young adulthood. The stakes of making a mistake are a little higher when theoretically, the entire world could be watching with the click of a button. Anyone who has sent a text or email to the wrong person, liked a post they didn’t mean to or had someone share a picture they didn’t want public can relate to that anxiety. This anxiety is also an opportunity for humor. As my friends and I experienced similar situations and anxieties during our time as students, we often adopted the “if you don’t laugh, you’ll cry” attitude. It is that balance of understanding the seriousness of a situation while managing to find the humor that I tried to bring to Fifth Year.

In most of my creative writing to date, I have adhered rather strictly to the ‘write what you know’ adage. I saw this project to push myself, both as a creative challenge and because my university experience was, frankly, not that exciting. My biggest challenge then, was incorporating my experiences, my friends experiences and stories we’d heard and shaping those into characters and storylines worthy of television, thus taking the project further away from my own life and experiences. As I continued to see how important relatability and authenticity are, I struggled to find a balance between keeping things realistic versus boring. Ultimately my writing benefitted when I properly defined the characters separately from the people and events they were inspired

30

by. Allowing the characters a life of their own made it easier to think of how they might

‘realistically’ react to things.

My other major takeaway from a creative standpoint was learning to move on from ideas.

As the project continued to progress and my research informed it, the project naturally changed.

However, I found myself holding on to small things, such as bits of dialogue that I thought were especially clever, even when they didn’t serve a scene anymore. On a larger scale, I was slow to recognize the need for major change. I was originally intent on writing eleven characters. While I loved the idea of a full house of characters, it was hurting my ability to lend authenticity to each of them. The takeaway for me here is to more frequently and openly reassess where the project is headed and if my ideas are still in line with that vision.

31

Next Steps and Concluding Thoughts

Going forward, my research would benefit from more in-depth interviews with viewers.

There is more to learn from the viewer’s reactions and thoughts from encouraging longer form conversation rather than short reviews. Doing so would eliminate the ‘generic’ category of reviews which did not provide enough information to analyze. Further, it would possibly eliminate the over-representation of the mediated mode, as questioning might encourage viewers to look beyond the production value and style of a series and think more deeply about their own reaction and interpretation of it. Looking at a wider range of shows that are of interest to millennials would also be beneficial. Since the beginning of my research, shows such as Hulu’s Shrill and Netflix’s

Special have contributed to the category and the definition of a ‘millennial sitcom’.

In terms of the creative work, upon the completion of my master’s the next step is to distribute the pilot and bible to industry contacts. The ideal outcome would be to see the series produced either for a television or an OTT service. Failing that, the pilot and bible will still be used as a calling card to demonstrate my creative abilities. The creation of Fifth Year as a part of my

MRP was a journey which required extensive reflection on the kind of writer I aspire to be, the kind of content I want to create and what kind of impact I’d like to have. Ultimately, my research helped guide the project to a point where it is meant to be both thoroughly entertaining and commercial while still making a comment on culture. Fifth Year hopes to capture the anxiety felt by young adults leaving university in a way that is real and humorous, that is its “cultural phenomenon”. Thus the humor is rooted in moments of relatability rather than laugh out loud jokes. It is designed to be enjoyed from the referential mode of reception. These key elements of my research helped to reinforce my vision for the series and characters. The result is a socially relevant and (hopefully) funny reflection on the very early stages of modern young adulthood.

32

Works Cited

Adalian, Josef and Maria Elena Fernandez. “The Business of Too Much TV.” Vulture, 18, May

2016, https://www.vulture.com/2016/05/peak-tv-business-c-v-r.html

Arnaz, Desi and Jess Oppenheimer, creators. I Love Lucy. Colombia Broadcasting System, 1951.

Bakkila, Blake. “What is Friendsgiving: 3 Facts You Didn’t Know About the Tradition.” Real

Simple, 09 Nov. 2018, https://www.realsimple.com/holidays-

entertaining/holidays/thanksgiving/what-is-friendsgiving

Barlow, Aaron. “I Love Lucy: An Appreciation.” The 25 Sitcoms That Changed Television:

Turning Points in American Culture, edited by Laura Westengard and Aaron Barlow, 2017,

pp. 3-14.

Brooks, James L. and , creators. Mary Tyler Moore Show. Colombia Broadcasting

System, 1970.

Brown, Robert S. “Cheers: Searching for the Ideal Public Sphere in the Ideal Public House.” The

Sitcom Reader, Second Edition: America Re-viewed, Still Skewed, edited by Mary M.

Dalton and Laura R. Linder, 2016, pp. 177-184.

Brown, Ruth. “Hollywood Creeps Have Ruined a lot of Classic TV.” New York Post, 10 Jan.

2018, nypost.com/2018/01/09/the-post-pervnado-era-has-made-a-lot-of-classic--

cringeworthy/

Burrows, James, Glen Charles and Les Charles, creators. Cheers. National Broadcast Group, 1982.

Butler, Bethonie. “Should We Forgive ‘Friends’ for Feeling a Little Offensive in 2016?” The

Washington Post, 18 Feb. 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/should-

we-forgive-friends-for-feeling-a-little-offensive-in-2016/2016/02/18/e8d47280-d0d3-

11e5-b2bc-988409ee911b_story.html

33

Cherlin, Andrew J. "The Deinstitutionalization of American Marriage." Journal of Marriage and

Family, vol. 66, no. 4, 2004, pp. 848-861.

“Christmas and the Hard-Luck Kid II.” The Mary Tyler Moore Show, written by James L. Brooks

and Allan Burns, directed by , season one, episode fourteen, Colombia

Broadcasting Systems, 1970.

Cobb, Shelley, Neil Ewen, and Hannah Hamad. "Friends Reconsidered: Cultural Politics,

Intergenerationality, and Afterlives." Television & New Media, vol. 19, no. 8, 2018, pp.

683-691.

Cooper, S. K. "What's so Funny? Audiences of Women's Stand-Up Comedy and Layered

Referential Viewing: Exploring Identity and Power." The Communication Review, vol.

22, no. 2, 2019, pp. 91-116.

Cox, Lee-Volker. Understanding Millennial, Generation X, and Baby Boomer Preferred

Leadership Characteristics: Informing Today’s Leaders and Followers. 2016. Brandman

University, PhD dissertation.

Crane, David and Marta Kauffman, creators. Friends. National Broadcasting Company, 1994.

Crozier, Susan. "Making it After all: A Reparative Reading of the Mary Tyler Moore show."

International Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 11, no. 1, 2008, pp. 51-67.

Dalton, Mary M., and Laura R. Linder. The Sitcom Reader: America Re-Viewed, Still

Skewed. State University of New York Press, 2016.

Dimock, Michael. “Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins.” Pew

Research Center, 17 Jan. 2019, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/17/where-

millennials-end-and-generation-z-begins/

34

Environics. “Canadian millennials: social values study.” The Environics Institute, Feb. 2017,

www.environicsinstitute.org/docs/default-source/project-documents/canadian-millennial-

social-values-study/final-report.pdf?sfvrsn=394cf27a_2

Falcone, Dana R. “Master of None cast reveal character similarities.” Entertainment Weekly, 10

Nov. 2015, https://ew.com/article/2015/11/10/master-of-none-cast-character-similarities/

Filippo, Maria S. "“Art Porn Provocauteurs”: Queer Feminist Performances of Embodiment in

the Work of Catherine Breillat and Lena Dunham." The Velvet Light Trap, vol. 77, no. 1,

2016, pp. 28-49.

Finn, Paula. Sitcom Writers Talk Shop: Behind the Scenes with Carl Reiner, Norman Lear, and

Other Geniuses of TV Comedy. Rowman & Littlefield, 2018.

Fisher, Alyssa and Louisa Ha. “What do digital natives watch on YouTube?” The Audience and

Business of Youtube and Online Videos, edited by Louisa Ha, Lexington Books, 2018, pp.

29-40.

Galchen, Rivka and Leslie Jamison. “Why Do We Hate Cliché?” The New York Times, 6 Jan.

2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/books/review/why-do-we-hate-clich.html

“Give Me a Ring Sometime” Cheers, written by Glen Charles, Les Charles,

and Heide Perlman, directed by James Burrows, National Broadcast Group, 1982.

Gomez-Uribe, Carlos A., and Neil Hunt. "The Netflix Recommender System: Algorithms,

Business Value, and Innovation." ACM Trans. Manage. Inf. Syst. 6.4 (2015): 1-19. Print.

Havas, Julia, and Maria Sulimma. "Through the Gaps of My Fingers: Genre, Femininity, and

Cringe Aesthetics in Dramedy Television." Television & New Media, 2018, pp.

152747641877783.

Hunt, Darnell. “Hollywood Story: Diversity, Writing and the End of Hollywood as We Know

35

It.” The SAGE Handbook of Television Studies, edited by Manuel Alvarado, Milly

Buonanno, Herman Gray and Toby Miller, 2015, pp. 163-174.

Ishii, Douglas S. "Diversity Times Three: The 'Modern Family Effect' and the Privatization of

Diversity." Camera Obscura: A Journal of Feminism, Culture, and Media Studies, vol.

32, no. 96, 2017, pp. 33.

Katims, Michael. “Cheers: Where Everybody Knows Your Name.” The 25 Sitcoms That

Changed Television, edited by Laura Westengard and Aaron Barlow, ABC-CLIO, LCC,

2018, pp. 153-164.

Kotz, Paul E. “Reaching the Millennial Generation in the Classroom”. Universal Journal of

Educational Research, vol. 4, no. 2, 2016, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1099791.pdf

Kuipers, Giselinde. "South Park Boys and Sex and the City Women: Television Trade,

Narrowcasting and the Export of Gender Categories." Interactions: Studies in

Communication & Culture, vol. 2, no. 3, 2012, pp. 179-196.

Kutulas, Judy. “Liberated Women and New Sensitive Men: Reconstructing Gender in the 1970s

Workplace Comedies.” The Sitcom Reader, Second Edition: America Re-viewed, Still

Skewed, 2016, pp. 121-132

“Love is All Around.” The Mary Tyler Moore Show, created by James L. Brooks and Allan

Burns, performance by Mary Tyler Moore, season 1, episode 1, Colombia Broadcasting

Systems, 1970.

Michelle, Carolyn. "Modes of Reception: A Consolidated Analytical Framework." The

Communication Review, vol. 10, no. 3, 2007, pp. 181-222.

Merriam-Webster. “Where Does ‘Friendsgiving’ Come From?” Merriam-Webster,

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/friendsgiving-meaning

36

O’Connor, Maureen. “Outsourcing Adulthood: Can you ever really grow up if you can’t do

anything for yourself?” The Cut, 7 April, 2019, www.thecut.com/2019/04/are-

millennials-learning-to-outsource-their-adulthood.html

“The One with the Boobies.” Friends, created by David Crane and Marta Kauffman, performance

by Fisher Stevens, season one, episode thirteen, National Broadcasting Company, 1994.

“The One Where Monica Gets a Roommate (Pilot).” Friends, written by David Crane and Marta

Kauffman, directed by James Burrows, National Broadcasting Company, 1994.

“The One Where Underdog Gets Away.” Friends, written by David Crane, Marta Kauffman, Jeff

Greenstein and Jeff Strauss, directed by James Burrows, season one, episode nine, National

Broadcasting Company, 1994.

Raikar, Rutika. The Binge Watching Trend: An Analysis of Audience Behavior and Network

Strategies in a Competitive Environment. 2017. Drexel University, PhD dissertation.

Reiner, Carl, creator. The Dick Van Dyke Show. Colombia Broadcasting System, 1961. (1961).

“Someone Single, Someone Blue.” Cheers, written by James Burrows, Glen Charles and Les

Charles, season one, episode twenty, National Broadcast Group, 1982.

Stein, Joel. “The Me Me Me Generation”, Time Magazine, 20 May 2013,

https://time.com/247/millennials-the-me-me-me-generation/

Siegel, Carol. “Two Funerals and a Wedding: Not So Nice Jewish Girls in Transparent and

Broad City.” Intercourse in Television and Film: the Presentation of Explicit Sex Acts,

edited by Lindsay Coleman and Carol Siegel, Lexington Books, 2018, pp. 157-177.

“Thanksgiving Orphans.” Cheers, written by Glen Charles, Les Charles, James Burrows, Cheri

Steinkellner and Bill Steinkellner, directed by James Burrows, season five, episode nine,

National Broadcast Group, 1986.

37

Tully, Meg. "Constructing a Feminist Icon through Erotic Friend Fiction: Millennial Feminism

on Bob's Burgers." Critical Studies in Media Communication, vol. 35, no. 2, 2018, pp.

194.

Waterman, David. "The Failure of Cultural Programming on Cable Tv: An Economic

Interpretation." Journal of Communication, vol. 36, no. 3, 1986, pp. 92-107.

Westengard, Laura, and Aaron Barlow. The 25 Sitcoms that Changed Television: Turning Points

in American Culture. Praeger, 2018.

Wiley, Victoria. So You Want to Create a Hit Sitcom: Analyzing the History of Sitcom Success.

2019. Ryerson University, research paper.

Wiley, Victoria. Who What When Where Why: Investigating How Millennial Audiences Interact

with Television. 2018. Ryerson University, research paper.

Woodward, Ellie. “21 times “friends” was actually really problematic.” Buzzfeed, 16 March

2018, www.buzzfeed.com/elliewoodward/times-friends-was-actually-really-problematic

Worland, Rick and John O’Leary. “The Rural Sitcom from The Real McCoys to Relevance.” The

Sitcom Reader, Second Edition: American Re-viewed, Still Skewed, edited by Mary M.

Dalton and Laura R. Linder, 2016, pp. 59-74.

Wright, Georgie. “Could friends *be* any more problematic?” Vice, 17 Jan. 2018,

i-d.vice.com/en_au/article/a3nqjj/could-friends-be-any-more-problematic

Word Count: 9,873

38