Comments on: Tweets of Anarchy: Showrunners on Twitter http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/ Responses to Media and Culture Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:35:04 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.7.5 By: Lone Star Lament: Kyle Killen Discusses the Series’ Rise and Demise at Flow 2010 « Cultural Learnings http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-30156 Sat, 02 Oct 2010 05:45:55 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-30156 […] When he spoke about his interaction with fans (and non-fans) on Twitter, he noted that this was not something he discussed with the network, nor something he thought would “become a thing.” He talked about how it gave him that sense of hope, that there were perhaps people out there who didn’t watch but might watch again, who could help the show pull off a stunning upset and start trending upwards. Ultimately it wasn’t enough the save the series, but I think it created a profile for him as a writer which will serve him quite well in the future, and offered an interesting case study for future showrunners who choose to engage with fans from the beginning (or perhaps even before the beginning) in this fashion (which, if you missed it a few weeks ago, I wrote about a bit for Antenna). […]

]]>
By: Jennifer Smith http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27806 Sat, 18 Sep 2010 19:54:07 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27806 This is a great article. While I don’t really follow showrunners on twitter, I’ve noticed a very similar phenomenon with comic book creators, who have formed an active and vibrant community in the twittersphere. Comics creators have always been more accessible than a lot of creative types, because of the smaller audience and the number of conventions, signings, and other appearances they rack up, but twitter has really broadened their exposure. It’s hard to be a comic book fan and NOT get to know the creators more personally through twitter (and the seemingly weekly website and podcast interviews they give), and that has, I think, definitely affected the audience relationship.

I wonder, additionally, how the relationships between the creators affects audience reception — within comics, at least, the creators very frequently hold conversations among themselves, and evidence of their friendships beyond the professional boundaries is abundant. Does recognizing constellations of like-minded creators who are likely to communicate and collaborate influence the perception of those people, for the audience? Are people more likely to read Matt Fraction’s work because of his friendships with Warren Ellis and Brian Michael Bendis?

I also agree with those who feel the tension, as critics, between being honest and being nice to creators you’ve gotten to know. I’ve been relatively lucky in that the creators I’ve formed relationships with put out quality work that I don’t have to criticize frequently, but I know there are opinions, even very mild and polite opinions, that I’ve stopped myself from expressing on twitter because I worried it might upset someone I admire.

]]>
By: Diane http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27733 Sat, 18 Sep 2010 01:29:13 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27733 Now *this* was funny.

]]>
By: Jason Mittell http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27732 Sat, 18 Sep 2010 01:16:06 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27732 Todd – important point that this is a problem with all journalism, and thankfully the stakes of getting enamored with insider sources are far lower for TV critics than political or military journalists.

Another facet of this problem which hasn’t seemed to impact the TV crit-osphere (yet?) is the Peter Travers Effect – writing reviews not to offer insight, but to generate pull quotes for press packs & posters. Once Myles and Todd start getting quoted on DVD covers, we can pillory them for selling out…

]]>
By: Dan Harmon http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27730 Sat, 18 Sep 2010 00:35:58 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27730 Actually, if you think about it, your response to my response to your comment goes to support the point I’m making in my response to your comment more than your comment supports the point of the article, and at least half as much as your tweets about your response to my response to your comment on the article about my tweets support the point of the show itself. At least that’s MY opinion.

]]>
By: Todd VDW http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27728 Sat, 18 Sep 2010 00:28:24 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27728 A bigger problem is this simple fact: Over the course of a show, journalists who cover it are usually also critics who review it, and they’ll meet the show’s principals and creative crew many, many times. It’s not the same thing as an author or director you might interview once or twice (though certainly someone like Roger Ebert has met directors he admires many, many times). The longer Community is on, the more times I’ll talk to its cast and producers, and the less they’ll be abstract people on my TV and the more they’ll be, y’know, human beings I’ve met and talked with several times, even though it’s in a completely professional capacity. I’m not saying this problem is unique to TV coverage – all branches of journalism have a similar question of just where the line is – but it’s certainly one I’ve been contemplating, the more interviews I do.

]]>
By: Todd VDW http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27727 Sat, 18 Sep 2010 00:22:08 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27727 I would generally agree with Sepinwall. Learning how many showrunners read my stuff has made me use snark a lot less, which tends to be a goal I have anyway. I try not to go easy on shows – even shows I really like – when they have off episodes, but if I have a criticism, I try to express it as clearly and respectfully as possible. I doubt a showrunner will read it and agree with me so much that he or she changes direction for the show, but I like to imagine he or she can say, “I disagree, but I see where you’re coming from.” That’s the goal, at least.

]]>
By: wcdixon http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27719 Fri, 17 Sep 2010 22:48:34 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27719 It was Sepinwall.

And it was probably just Harmon’s assistant that commented. I mean, how could a showrunner have time to visit blogs and websites…COMMUNITY is filming right now!

]]>
By: Diane http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27718 Fri, 17 Sep 2010 22:36:51 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27718 I think it was Sepinwall (maybe Poniewozik) who said his only reaction to knowing showrunners/actors/etc are reading his posts is to not be gratuitously mean, but then he wants that to be a goal anyway. I think that’s the best approach, no self-censorship, but hard in practice. I don’t think it changed my House reviews, for example, but I did stop doing Canadian TV reviews. The difference in professionalism between the respective reactions was key though.

And of course it occurred to me that Sutter or Harmon might read my comment here but figured this is audience/critic turf, and it’d be pretty hypocritical of those guys in particular to object to someone expressing an opinion.

]]>
By: Myles McNutt http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/09/17/tweets-of-anarchy-showrunners-on-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-27712 Fri, 17 Sep 2010 22:13:22 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=5979#comment-27712 I think that you raise a number of interesting points here, Jason.

Louis C.K.’s comments interest me because they’re not so much responding to the review as they are adding to it: he seemed to be interested in expanding discussion, and further explaining the series’ function and purpose, and decided to interact with the community surrounding the posts rather than emailing the critics (which he certainly could have done, and then waited for the interview to post or the like). It’s not dissimilar from showrunners who would wade into the TWoP forums back in the day, albeit now merged more clearly with secondary textual analysis (which is what makes it really fascinating to me).

I’m equally fascinated, though, by the notion of self-censoring (however subtly) in order to take the “Stumble-upon” factor into account. I recently discovered that a showrunner was reading my largely positive reviews of their series, and my mind immediately went to the one negative review I had written. I don’t regret anything I wrote, but I do think that such knowledge would influence future writing, whether I want it to or not. It’s also something that would be different for those in different positions, raising questions about whose job it is to write negative criticism and what sort of different levels of cultural capital bloggers, fans, critics, scholars and other groups have in such matters.

But, rather than going on, let’s save it for Flow.

]]>