THERE IS MORE(S) IN TELEVISION STUDYING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TELEVISION AND MORAL IMAGINATION ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. dr. J.W. Zwemmer ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties ingestelde commissie, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Agnietenkapel op donderdag 26 april 2007 om 12.00 uur door Antonia Francisca Maria Krijnen geboren te Breda PROMOTIECOMMISSIE: Promotor: Prof. Dr. K. Schönbach Co-Promotor: Dr. I.C. Meijer Overige leden: Prof. Dr. J. van Dijck Dr. J. Jansz Dr. G. Kuipers Prof. Dr. S. de Leeuw Prof. Dr. E.S.H. Tan COVER DESIGN: THOMAS ROUW CONTENTS Foreword Chapter 1 Introduction 11 §1.1 Television in Debate 12 §1.1.1 The Public Debate 12 §1.1.2 The Academic Debate 15 §1.2 The C/culture Dichotomy 18 §1.3 The Ubiquitous Narrative 22 Chapter 2 Television in a Literary Framework 26 §2.1 Moral Imagination and Television 27 §2.1.1 Insight into: Morally Relevant Issues 28 §2.1.2 Insight into: Moral Deliberation 31 §2.1.3 Insight into: The Human Character, the 35 Other and the Self §2.1.4 The Consequences for Television 37 §2.2 The Narrative and Moral Imagination 38 §2.2.1 Television as a Narrative Medium 39 §2.2.2 The Content of Television Narratives 44 §2.2.2.1 Previous Studies: Morality in Prime 47 Time Television §2.2.3 The Viewer of the Television Narrative 49 §2.2.3.1 Previous Studies: Moral Reflection 53 Induced by Television §2.3 Critical Notes on the Literary Framework 54 §2.4 Research Questions 55 Chapter 3 Moral Insights in Prime Time Television 59 §3.1 A Mixed Method Analysis 59 §3.1.1 A Short Note on Two Weeks of Prime Time 67 Television §3.2 Moral Issues in Dutch Prime Time Narratives 69 §3.2.1 Moral Themes and Moral Discourses 70 §3.2.1.1 Civil Conduct 71 §3.2.1.2 Politics 73 §3.2.1.3 Family 74 §3.2.1.4 The Good Life 76 §3.3 Moral Deliberation in Prime Time Narratives 78 §3.4 Subject Positions in Prime Time Narratives 82 §3.5 Moral Insights in Fictional, Non-Fictional, and 86 Infotainment/Entertainment Genres §3.6 The Origin of Programmes 91 §3.7 Conclusions 93 Chapter 4 Moral Maturity Evoked by Television 97 §4.1 Methods: the In-depth Interview and 98 Grounded Theory §4.1.1 Method of Analysis 100 §4.1.2 Introduction of the Interviewees 102 §4.2 Moral Reflection Evoked by Television 103 Narratives §4.2.1 Three Modes of Reflection 104 §4.2.2 Insight into: Morally Relevant Issues 109 §4.2.2.1 Situated Interviewees 115 §4.2.3 Insight into: Moral Deliberation 119 §4.2.3.1 Situated Interviewees 120 §4.2.4 Insight into: the Human Character 121 §4.2.4.1 Situated Interviewees 124 §4.2.5 Genre Preference and Moral Reflection 124 §4.3 Kohlberg Meets the Literary Culture: An 125 Integration of Approaches §4.4 Conclusion 131 Chapter 5 Moral Generations and Television Narratives 134 §5.1 Research Design 135 §5.1.1 Survey Construction 137 §5.1.2 The Sample 141 §5.2 Results 143 §5.2.1 Insight into: Morally Relevant Issues 145 §5.2.2 Insight into: Moral Deliberation 154 §5.2.3 Insight into: the Human Character 156 §5.3 Discussion and Conclusion 158 Chapter 6 Summary and Conclusions 164 §6.1 The Content of the Toolbox 164 §6.2 The Audience's Use of the Toolbox 167 §6.3 A Quantitative Approach of the Use of the 170 Toolbox §6.4 Further Research 173 Summary in Dutch 176 References 181 Appendices I. Programmes Analysed per Genre 192 II. Topic List In-depth Interviews 198 III. Original Interview Quotes 200 IV. Survey 208 FOREWORD For all my live, I have been a 'narrative junkie'. I read books and comics, I wrote stories and papers, I watched television and I studied for seemingly endless periods. In 2002 I finally got where I wanted to be: as a PhD- student working on a dissertation about the love of my life: television. This dissertation is not a story on its own. Naturally, this story is part of my own individual story and that of many people surrounding me. As this is the first page, I think this an appropriate place to thank those without whom this story would have known a premature ending and no closure at all. Let the story begin with 'my Ph.D. club'. As a television specialist I have been warmly welcomed by the 'internet people'. Because of the interdisciplinary character of our projects we could find each other in our two weekly meetings and I have benefited greatly of your comments. Coming from different disciplines you have dared me to open my eyes for the blind spots of my own specialism. Over the years, I have been a member of several reading groups. As a starting scholar I tremendously enjoyed the discourse reading group at the ASSR. The open sharing of thoughts and opinions have inspired me to be more critical towards my own work. The VOC group forced me to go beyond my own discipline, which has enlarged my view of academia. Not to mention the pleasure that is found in debate. Last but no least, the 'no wuckas feminist reading group' in which I found friends that like me enjoy feminist theory in a no wuckas sense. Besides breaking the habit of writing and speaking in traditional truck drivers English, they have helped me through tough times and quite often made me think: 'no wucka's mate!' CHEERS! As most stories, this story has been born in sometimes wobbly circumstances. In concern of this wobbliness I want thank Giselinde, Joost and Jeroen who have kept an eye on me, supported me, and often gave me good advice. I have to add, that they also make for good company and fortunately I have more often enjoyed their friendship than their advice. Turning back to the topic at hand, I want to especially mention Jeroen Jansz, Sandra Zwier, Peter Neijens, Liesbet van Zoonen, and Claes de Vreese for their support and their willingness to make quick decisions. To take a dramatic turn in this narrative, it is time to thank all colleagues that have made my time at ASCoR joyful. There were of course the people from the Media Entertainment section, people I have shared rooms with, 'teaching colleagues', and 'course colleagues'. With many I have enjoyed a chat in the corridors of the OIH, a coffee in the canteen, a drink in the Engelbewaarder, and an occasional dinner, all of the above make working life pleasurable. For now, it is time to write a few lines for my highly appreciated supervisor, professor dr. Klaus Schönbach. To do this properly I switch languages: Sehr geehrter Herr Professor Schönbach, lieber Klaus. Unter Ihrer Begleitung bin ich zur Forscherin geworden. Ihre Begeisterungen für das Thema dieser Dissertation, aber auch die Großzügigkeit, mit der Sie Ihr so breit gefächertes Wissen mit mir teilten, haben wesentlich zu meiner professionellen Entwicklung und der Entstehung dieser Dissertation beigetragen. Als ein Doktorvater im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes haben sie mich mit der Wissenschaft spielen lassen. Ab dem ersten Moment unserer Zusammenarbeit erlaubten Sie mir frei zu denken, und ich danke Ihnen für das hierbei so erforderliche Vertrauen. Unsere gemeinsame Liebe für die Schlichtheit war stets eine Motivation, meine Gedanken deutlich und klar in Worte zu fassen. Für all dies meinen aufrechten Dank. As every narrative, this one needs to be situated also in the private sphere. I would especially like to thank my dear friends Thomas, Pascal, Sandra, Femke, Guido, Miranda, Marloes, Alex, Suzanne, Paula, Frank, Juul, Noor, Annemieke, Kars, Lia, and Marieke. Besides providing the necessary distractions, they have helped me to get 'the job jobbed' by collecting data. Endless hours of prime time television were videotaped by them, their family members, colleagues and partners were 'lend out' to me as 'interview-material' and as guinea-pigs for my survey. Furthermore, I would like to thank the Schrijver family for welcoming me so heartily into their family. The 'easy going' and care sometimes kept my mind of things that worried me and often cheered me up. Last but not least, there is Remco. His 'natural science', non- political way of thinking often shed a different light on the various hurdles I faced during the last two years of writing this dissertation. However, there is so much more than that. At least one plot line in my narrative has reached closure over the last few years. Thanks to you, Rem, I can finally say: 'I am home'. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 'So, why then do you still like Sesame Street?' 'Well, when I was a kid I used to learn things from it. I remember, Bert was just sitting there and then Ernie walked in. Ernie, being a prankster, wanted to play a joke on Bert and gave Bert a really good fright. Bert started screaming and waving his arms around. That was when I understood that it is not funny to frighten someone, because Bert was really scared.' This conversation took place in a bar between two men just over 20 years old. Firstly, this story brought to mind the scene he was describing. I remember Bert sitting there in his chair, Ernie sneaking up to him, and giving a good blow on his trumpet, Bert jumping up and running around screaming.