television uber alles?

[cellio]

There's something I don't get, and it seems to affect enough people I know that I ought to get it in self-defense. Some people prioritize TV shows -- which can be recorded and watched later -- over important things they would otherwise do with other people. Two examples from yesterday:

Yesterday afternoon I was helping a friend pack for a move. She expected another good friend to be there too (she'd said she would), but that friend showed up as we were finishing with the explanation that she had to watch the football game first. (The friend I was helping, on the other hand, was listening to the game on the radio while we packed.)

Our congregation is currently interviewing for an associate rabbi, and I'm on the search committee. A couple weeks ago we were given the date for a visit from one candidate. Last night we got the schedule of activities, which includes stuff on Sunday afternoon. A member of the committee (and one who really needs to be involved in this) sent mail saying he wanted to watch the football game for 4.5 hours out of the middle of that day and asked that we reschedule things. Sunday, by the way, is the only full day available for most of us; the candidate is flying in Saturday night and most of us work Monday. (He'll be spending Monday with synagogue staff.) Not to put too fine a point on it, but the choice of associate rabbi will affect us for several years; getting it wrong would be bad.

Now I understand that, to those who care, these are important football games. But in neither case are these people looking for excuses to avoid the other activities; they are just prioritizing the games over in the first case helping a friend and in the second case a significant congregational obligation. While I don't care about sports there have been TV shows (well ok, show) that I was obsessive about, ones that I made sure to see on the day of the broadcast because (1) I was eager and (2) I didn't want conversations the next day to spoil things for me. But I didn't stay home from places I would otherwise have been; I used the VCR. It didn't matter if I watched the broadcast at 9 or the tape at 11, after all. And this was true even for the climactic episodes, the ones we waited all week for. The only exception I ever made to this was for a season where the broadcast was at 11PM; I made sure to be home from the post-SCA-meeting socializing in time. Given that the meetings were at 8 and lasted an hour or so, I didn't feel I was blowing anyone off.

What is the thrill of watching a TV show live, a thrill that's significant enough that you'll pre-empt other plans?

Comments

[ironangel]

in this prticular instance, it may be due to the fact that these are playoff games - any one of these could be the last game of the season, and the play tends to be pretty good (usually).

if I had a VCR, I would definitely prefer to hang out with people Friday nights instead of being wed to SciFi; I knew people back in college who scheduled their lives arond episodes of B5 and it drove me batty. I don't know that I would watch a football game that was recorded earlier, though.

[cellio]

I understand the problem when people don't have VCRs.

I don't know that I would watch a football game that was recorded earlier, though.

Can you help me to understand? What is the qualitative difference between watching a taped game and watching the tape of the climactic B5 episode?

[cafemusique.livejournal.com]

To me, there is a feeling of "connection" when I'm watching something live, in a way that doesn't seem to exist when it's on tape. I think somebody could have a very popular channel called Live Event TV, providing uncut coverage of live events (especially news and sports).

I think it's that connected feeling and the sense that one could witness the unexpected that leads news stations to go into "breaking news" mode at the drop of a hat, no matter how unimportant the stories, as long as they have live pictures. The same thing that causes news stations to send their crews into situations where any sane and/or law-abiding person would have evacuated for their own safety.

That said, people ought to set reasonable limits. If I've committed to do something, I can't imagine asking people to switch because of my TV preferences.

One of my guilty pleasures is watching Formula 1 auto racing. I can usually watch qualifying live on Saturdays, but the races are always on Sunday afternoons. But many of the races are in Europe, starting at 8 AM Eastern, and lasting for 1½-2 hours. There's no way for me to watch them live without shortchanging my preparations before our 10 AM service. So I'm forced to watch them later. All too often, I will accidentally see the result of the race before I've watched. Oh, well.

Even when the circuit comes to the Americas (there are races in Canada, the US, and Brazil), I can't always arrange my schedule to see them live. I can tell my mother I'd rather not go out for lunch today, but I can't expect the entire world (or any group I'm a part of) to be held hostage to my preferences.

[cellio]

I think it's that connected feeling and the sense that one could witness the unexpected that leads news stations to go into "breaking news" mode at the drop of a hat

Ah, a feeling of "I was there!" when something big happens? Interesting.

[mortuus.livejournal.com]

Though I agree with previous commenters that there is a improved experience to the TV watching when watching it live or with friends (and I'm a major TV addict, so I know of which I speak), I have to say that putting TV ahead of friends and religious obligations seems like seriously distorted priorities.

[nsingman.livejournal.com]

It's really not hard to understand. Those people just have different priorities than you do. Yesterday afternoon's game, though - that was the Steelers! Good grief! You live in the holy city, Monica, so you must understand. :-)

When I have other plans, even if there's a game I want to see, I tape it and watch it later. If those plans involved going to a game, that would be different, of course. Otherwise, I try to arrange my schedule with the following hierarchy, in order of decreasing priority:

My children's needs
My wife's needs
My needs
My wife's interests
My interests
My children's interests
My friends' needs (this may go right below my needs in emergencies)
My friends interests
Everything else

A good football game falls under the category of "My interests." :-)

[cellio]

You live in the holy city, Monica, so you must understand. :-)

I understand that next Sunday afternoon would be a really good time to catch a crowd-free movie if I weren't already busy. :-)

A good football game falls under the category of "My interests." :-)

That makes sense.

So where on that list do you place external obligations (employer, chosen community, whatever)? "Everything else"?

[sethg]

Our congregation is currently interviewing for an associate rabbi, and I'm on the search committee.

As a former member of my synagogue's rabbinic search committee, I extend my deepest sympathies to you.

[cellio]

I asked to be on the committee, actually. (I think I'm the only member who's not a member of the board, or staff.) Primarily, I care deeply that we make good rabbinic choices (we tend to have longer-term rabbis, not a lot of short stints), and while my participation doesn't necessarily affect that, at least I'll feel like I was able to help. And secondarily, seeing how the process works seems potentially useful.

[ichur72.livejournal.com]

I don't quite get it either, not least since I have to start taping some shows if I ever want to watch them due to conflicts with my son's bedtime routine. That said, this isn't uncommon. My husband is a football fan, and he also does not like taping games. When I asked why, he said something about it being impossible to record a whole game since VCR tapes only held 4 hours. Ummm, can't you set some tapes for 6? And don't some people (not including us) have Tivo? But whatever.

[cellio]

6-hour tapes are standard. Some are 8. I don't think there's a valid capacity argument against taping. There is, of course, the "ack! the VCR might fail! the tape might jam! we might get a 30-second power outage that shuts down the recording!" argument, but that's different. (And I haven't actually heard someone make that argument.)

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

I think the only good argument is that the show in question would suffer from the lower quality of a taped image. I wouldn't think sports is in that category, but I'm not a sports fan.

Trying to put yourself in their shoes

[brokengoose.livejournal.com]

Imagine that, for the convenience of the elderly and invalids in the congregation, your congregation offered live services broadcast on a public-access cable channel. (I don't know how Jewish congregations handle this, but I know that some Christian churches do this.) Most people watch the services "live" and cancel other plans. Some, though, hail the convenience of the broadcast service because they can record it and watch at their leisure.

(If you'd like to stretch the analogy, imagine that your congregation has grown to a point where there's simply no room for everyone to be there in person, so most people watch the service remotely.)

I suspect that, in that case, you might see why many people would be willing to cancel other plans in order to be home for the broadcast. They are, however indrectly, still participating from home. They are personally affirming their membership in the congregation by making the sacrifice required to watch the service live. There is even cultural encouragement to participate in the activity at the proper time.

Spend a few minutes thinking about the sort of reasoning that people might use in that sort of situation, and then realize that, for some people, "the game" is as important as (or even more important than) their religious beliefs.

Re: Trying to put yourself in their shoes

[cellio]

That looks like a good analogy. Thanks.

There are some challenges from this particular scenario, but I'm trying to set them aside. (For example, certain prayers are actually time-bound, and then there's the question of whether prayer, which involves you and God, is different from activities that only involve other people.) I know of congregations that, for the high holy days, have to put people in remote rooms with video feeds because the sanctuary isn't large enough, and there are both people who prefer that and people who get there early to get seats in the sanctuary. But being in that remote room, while (IMO) not as good as being in the sanctuary, would still be way better than catching the rerun on tape.

[tangerinpenguin.livejournal.com]

Another problem that I don't think has been raised is that it's much harder to timeshift a 4.5 hour playoff game than to timeshift one hour of West Wing. Even one hour each of West Wing, Battlestar, Lost, Alias and Veronica Mars would be easier because there's nothing lost in the five hours not being contiguous.

If spending half a day watching a game is important to you at all, and you have anything else going on in your life, chances are it's going to come up against a priority someone else thinks ought to be higher no matter when you slot it in. You have to decide that this particular "me time" is important enough to treat as a committment like other important committments, or you're likely going to be talked into missing it (or at least chunks of it) more often than not.

[cellio]

Good point; I had been thinking of afternoon games because both of these cases are in the afternoon, but this obviously wouldn't work for an evening game. With an afternoon game you can still watch in the evening (when you get home from the interview or helping the friend pack or whatever). 4.5 hours of game reduces to about 3.5 hours of signal after you fast-forward through the commercials.

[nickjong.livejournal.com]

I was considering offering the same thought experiment as brokengoose, but he or she beat me to it. Instead, I will try to make a related point. One key difference between television shows and televised sporting events is the traditions (and forms) out of which they grew. The former evolved from movies and theater. The most devoted fans will see the show on opening night, but in the end they are seeing only the (potentially much anticipated) first presentation of a production that has been rehearsed and refined for months.

For sporting events, no script ordains the outcome of the event. The actual time of the event is significant: it decides the victor. In the old days, to see the game, you had to attend it. You added your voice to the crowd cheering for your home team, which as a whole has a palpable effect on the flesh and blood athletes on the field. I have to believe that the "homefield advantage" is more than just familiarity with the local facilities. Cheering your team on, exclaiming each blow that lands in their favor, sharing in their defeats, this is how you support your team. This practice simply lives on, even in an era where most fans watch from the comfort of home. Whatever you think about the competitive nature of sports, one of its most fundamental qualities is the unity that it engenders.

Another commenter wrote about "magical thinking," and I wanted to add two more cents. One of the most touching beer commercials I've ever seen (sorry, I'm a guy) included a scene with two old men in a bar. Surrounding them you can see the upturned faces of other patrons, illuminated by the glow of the television set. The two men sit with heads bowed, hands clasped in prayer. Telling those two old guys that their prayers don't mean anything is missing the point.

That said, I do not really condone the behaviors that provoked your journal entry. Regardless of priorities, commitments made should be honored.

[magid.livejournal.com]

A tangential comment: I think of movies and theater as very different beasts for this kind of discussion. Movies really are going to be the same every time you show them (ignoring the issues of director's cuts and so on), while live performance will be different every time. Shows evolve, even with a complete script.

[cellio]

I hadn't considered the idea of vestigial home-field advantage effects. Thanks for pointing that out.

[dvarin.livejournal.com]

Would you regard them differently if they said "Please reschedule the meeting because there's a football game I'm planning to buy tickets to later."?

For other types of TV I'm clueless--I'm one of the people who never watches anyhing live anymore. :)

[dvarin.livejournal.com]

Sigh. Replace the singular 'they' in that comment with 'he'.

[sanpaku.livejournal.com]

Watching a taped game drains it of all meaning. I don't know why, but it does. There's just no real experience to the thing if you do it that way. I think everyone else has put it correctly already, but I'm adding my 2c. Just knowing that you can log on somewhere and find out the result makes the pointlessless of the thing unbearable. (Also, DVRs do fail, as the Mrs., who wanted to watch figure skating today, can attest.)

Icon off-topic

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

Ohmygod, it's a Grooks illustration! I've never run into anyone who knew about them.

Tangenting away from the topic....

[siderea]

It matters. I have no idea why it matters, but it obviously does.

I have a confession. I have a similar, but even less explicable, reaction to recorded music. No, I'm not talking about the difference between recorded and live music. I'm talking about the difference between broadcast recordings and putting the very same damned disc in the player for myself.

I prefer to listen to the radio for my alarm clock. I could buy a device to play me the CD of my choice -- or heck, randomly choose from all my CD's! -- to wake me up. I prefer to use the radio. I loathe the ads, which I could avoid if I listend to a CD. The sound quality is worse than if I listen to a CD. But I'd rather have the radio.

Because for some mad reason, it feels more live to me. It feels like communication, like someone else is in the room with me. Someone else picked the track which is playing and that choice reflects where their head is at. The radio can keep me company but a CD cannot, even though the radio is playing the same damn CDs.

Go fig.

Re: Tangenting away from the topic....

[cellio]

It feels like communication, like someone else is in the room with me. Someone else picked the track which is playing and that choice reflects where their head is at.

That someone made that choice is significant. If you found out that there was no DJ, that the station was just putting its collection onto shuffle-play with (if relevant) pre-recorded intros, would that change how you felt about it?

The radio, of course, can also expose you to music you don't already own, but that's orthogonal.

[hrj.livejournal.com]

You can argue about priorities, but there really is something irreplaceable about watching a sporting event live. I ran into this mental block back during the last Summer Olympics when there was pretty much nothing watchable live due to the time-zone thing. I was taping things like mad (and my friend SK was TIVO-ing things like mad) then we sat down to a long weekend of running through a selection of favorite events. The events that can be appreciated on an artistic level (e.g., gymnastics) were ok, but the rest was like drinking flat soda. It wasn't even a matter of knowing the outcome in advance (although that really spoiled for me the soccer match that tipped Irag out of the top rank of medals) but simply knowing the matter had already been decided. It isn't logical, but it's real.

Sometimes the priorities are a mask for something else, of course. My mother once commented that she had always been disappointed that I had preferred to watch Saturday morning cartoons over participating in the all-city youth orchestra (which rehearsed Saturday mornings). My response: "Mom, has it ever occurred to you that I would have been TERRIFIED at the thought of participating in the all-city orchestra?" I honestly don't recall the matter specifically, but I can feel in my bones how I would have responded to the prospect.

[cellio]

It isn't logical, but it's real.

That seems to be theme, yes. Ok; I guess I'm just wired differently; I had assumed that if you avoided hearing the results, you could enjoy the taped event just as much. But you (and others) are saying there's something special about the live broadcast.

Sometimes the priorities are a mask for something else, of course.

True. I don't think that's what happened in these two cases, but it does happen.

[jducoeur]

On the subject of sports, it's worth a "Me, too" -- there's an immediacy to watching a sporting event live that just doesn't exist when it's recorded. That's not the slightest bit rational, but very deeply ingrained. It's worth noting that I will often prioritize other things over watching a football game, but I *never* watch a recorded football game: if it isn't live, it becomes far less interesting, in a way I can't rightly explain. There's something about the ritual of watching the event live that loses its force when it's a tape. If I'm going to watch it at all, it has to be live.

As for B5 and its ilk (which most people didn't grapple with) -- this is the one show that I ever prioritized quite *that* high. There were a couple of reasons. One is community: B5 was so deeply central to my community that watching it religiously had near-ritual significance. Being glued to the TV at that particular time was an act of saying that one was part of the group. That's geeky, but I think it's quite true. I've never seen that happen to such a degree with any other show.

Another factor was simply sheer impatience. B5 grabbed me deep in the gut, and the more the series progressed, the more impatient I was to see the rest. This resulted in things like mass gatherings to watch tapes smuggled in from England. I didn't want to wait an extra *minute* to see the next chapter. Again, there is a community effect at work here: that degree of impatience was almost expected among much of the hard-geek crowd.

To be fair, things are changing in some important ways. In particular, I think that TiVo has had some subtle effects on mindset. When B5 was airing, I was unusual in the degree to which I *did* timeshift stuff. Today, timeshifting is routine, and I think that has begun to really break the "must watch it now" mentality. Indeed, it's become downright unusual for msmemory and me to watch anything except sports while it airs, and I've begun to timeshift entire seasons. I suspect that the "watch it now" thing will never entirely go away -- the desire to Be First is strong in many of us, and that applies to seeing the latest entertainment as much as anything -- but I'm not sure we'll ever see anything quite like the B5 phenomenon again, where much of the SF community was religiously glued to their sets at that time for *years* in a row...

B5 and time-shifting

[cellio]

B5 is the one show I gave priority to, too. I also received the bootleg tapes from the UK and shared them with others, and I always watched the episodes on broadcast night. But except for the year of the 11pm broadcast, I often watched them on tape delay, not during the broadcast. Maybe if there had been an active local community that gathered to watch that would have been different; that would have made B5 a social commitment, rather than something that I wouldn't let displace a social commitment (within reason).

B5 was aided by having a large net community that talked about the show with the creator. And the Lurker's Guide helped a lot, I'm sure, especially in helping newcomers to catch up. (We started watching during year 2, for instance, and only got tapes of the first year later. The Lurker's Guide gave me the essentials that I needed to get the smaller plot points.)

I've pretty much always time-shifted (episodes, not whole seasons). Often it's due to the broadcast time being inconvenient, but for many shows there's also the fact that watching the tape costs 50 minutes while watching the broadcast costs 60, and while that's not a big difference and I don't watch enough TV for it to be significant in the aggregate, well, I'm often still inclined to be stingy like that. Not if that's going to be inconvenient in other ways; sometimes I'll want to go to bed before I could finish watching a tape from a 10:00 show and I want to watch it that day so I just watch the broadcast. But not often.

[aliza250.livejournal.com]

Not everyone has the ability to easily and conveniently record TV shows. It's also sometimes hard to avoid spoilers about major sports events. (I've had to go to fairly major effort to avoid learning the outcomes of football games I'd taped this season, for example.)

With that said, though, you're proably talking about people who will either be watching the show/game with others, or are just being cluelessly rude.