theconversation.com: I was in New York two weeks ago being encouraged to clap and whoop enthusiastically by a warm-up comedian, as a member of the studio audience for The View, Whoopi Goldberg’s live daily talk show – think Loose Women with American attitude. Although we didn’t know it at the time, this was the last day The View would have a live audience for the foreseeable future. Now there are no studio audiences on either side of the Atlantic, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
10 comments:
This seems to have become a more unpopular opinion these days, but I actually genuinely cannot function watching a sitcom or stand-up without a studio audience telling me when to laugh. Perhaps I'm dumb or lazy or can't think for myself when it comes to comedy, but a show in that format without a laugh track makes me incredibly uncomfortable. For those reasons, I don't like The Office and I've been having a hard time watching these late-night talk shows where there's just silence after every joke in the host's monologue. This is a weird thing to think about for me, because I don't have any problem watching comedies in movie form, in YouTube/Tik Tok form, etc. It's strictly when it comes to sitcoms and stand-up. I can't wait for studio audiences to come back, because it has truly become apparent in the past couple of weeks how dearly I need and miss them.
This is another strange thing to think about that has a surprising amount of recent relevance to my recent experiences. A friend of mine participated in a live audience for a live talk show’s final week with an audience. It is very strange to sit and watch the final product with a component now missing, especially when programs like these are designed to be consumed with the persistent laughter in the background. It is very clear that studio audience laughter elicits laughter from an audience member from home. It is also clear that in some sitcoms, this kind of laughter can be used to cover up lazy writing. It is interesting to find these distinctions and see how writers may have adapted to create material that will be resoundingly funny at home. Although, they would have no idea considering they will not be receiving any immediate feedback in the way they are used to.
I truly did not know audiences for live shows are selected so rigorously. I had no idea that there were the dress rules for attending these live shows as an audience member, and the fact that you are selected as an audience member. This article also explains my question of why audience members for certain live shows always look the same. It’s because they’re looking for people with a certain look that reflects the demographic of the show. I guess I understand why they are selective though because you want to be in control of everything that goes on screen in your show. I really enjoyed the analysis of the audience’s role at live shows in this article. The audience in the show is something so subtle that most people probably don't think about when watching it. But yes, it would be so strange if I were to watch a live comedy but laugh alone at the screen. As the article writing, there’s just something about hearing a crowd laugh with you that makes these shows more energetic and enjoyable (and not awkward).
It is interesting to think about the ways in which the actions of others affect how we behave, going with the idea that the things people do are rules for how we should act. The author uses the word “permission” in the context of laughing during a TV show; if the speakers on our TVs project laughter from an assumed audience that we cannot see, then we are led to laugh too...because that is what everyone else is doing. Makers of television in the 1950’s had a keen awareness of the psychology of social conformity, and they figured out that the key to comedy is not making something that is hilarious, but to tell people to confirm that a joke is funny by laughing with a cue card. The idea of being a part of a studio audience seems strange to me. I do not necessarily mean that in a bad way, but the audiences of talk shows always seem so controlled. They are told when to laugh, when to stand up, and when they can and, more frequently, cannot go to the bathroom. I have been watching Jimmy Fallon’s at-home show on YouTube, and while it is still entertaining, I do not find it as comical. Perhaps that is because an audience is not telling me that it is okay if I laugh.
It’s really interesting to read about the impact a live studio audience has on reality tv and talk shows. I personally found it annoying when a fake studio audience was included in a fictional sitcom, so I went into the article against the idea of a live audience. However, reading the points that were stated changed my mind. It makes sense to have an audience for a live performance because performers get motivation from the reactions of the crowd. The crowd gives them the instant feedback they need, whether it be through laughs or silence. It’s easy to see how the removal of these audiences can impact the performance of others. Their craft may not be as strong without the reactions and there is certain art that needs to be seen by people in order to be perfected. That being said, the smart move is being made. If people’s lives can be saved then it’s worth it. A laugh isn't worth a whole life.
I personally don't watch live television shows so I never knew the impact the live audience was intended to have on the audience at home. I didn't even know that the live audiences were featured in the recordings at all. It's interesting to see the thought that goes into choosing and displaying the audiences. In every way, it is a controlled performance. To me, that would be unenjoyable because I don't like being told how and when to react and I also don't like feeling watched. But I guess that just delineates why that's not something I would enjoy and why it's not something I watch. While I was reading the article I felt the need to argue with the logic behind why they pick the people they pick and why they make the audience act in a specific way but as I thought about it from the point of view of an at-home viewer it all made sense. If I were watching something like Patriot Act and the entire audience were old white men I'd have a very different idea of what it was about to be about and it would also affect how I received the information. It's interesting to see the psychology behind their decisions.
One time like a year ago I was in the audience for Live with Kelly and Ryan, and I was honestly so shocked at how it all worked. After we entered, we were told what to do for like every single minute of the experience. I didn't realize how much we were directoed to clap, and laugh. They actually trained us how to "clap more loud" (yes they used those words". It was so weird. I do think it is quite awkward to watch talk shows now without and audience though. I am realizing that they are vital, and their reactions really help facilitating how the people at home view the jokes. In Jimmy Fallon, and other talk shows where the host is trying to make people consistently laugh, it is awkward when no one is laughing. Even if it is funny, it discourages at home viewers from laughing as much.
This was a really interesting article. I don't watch a ton of shows with live audiences, nor have I ever sat in the audience for one, but we all know how important an audience is. We all had that opening night of Seussical our junior year when the audience was so fired up that Mayzie had extra spunk, Gertrude’s tail was just small enough, and Horton saved the Who’s with more enthusiasm and love than ever before, simply because the Crawford High School audience filled all 150 plastic chairs with that token Gator school spirit. We have also all experienced the Sunday matinee of Our Town with house at 30% capacity, and a harmonic chorus of yawns echoing throughout every scene. Audiences matter, and how much the dynamic of these shows change is a really powerful example of that fact. I am just surprised that they are still recording these shows and putting the production crews and the hosts all at risk.
In all the pandemic news about people in the entertainment industry being out of work, I can honestly say that I hadn’t thought about the impact on studio audiences. They’re so commonplace on so many tv shows in some way or another that they almost blend in at this point. I thought the point about how studio laughter and recorded laugh tracks are used as essentially a cue to tell audiences what their reaction should be is interesting, and I know a lot of people who prefer their entertainment without them for that reason, taking the mindset of ‘the show should be able to be funny without telling me when I should laugh’. I do also think it’s been very weird seeing talk show and late-night show hosts in these past weeks doing their normal thing but without a crowd reacting to them - in that medium, we’ve grown so used to studio audiences that it’s unnatural for them to not be there.
Although I kind of knew the purpose of in-studio audiences and their phycological influence on performers and at-home audiences, I never heard anyone who has been the in-studio audience talking about their jobs. I like how the writer sounds like he participates as an in-studio audience with pride. I would like to know further about their hiring process. How do they get selected in the first place? Do they get paid? In recorded shows, how strict are the rules to keep the information before the show gets on the air?
Japanese broadcasts also suspended the use of in-studio audiences. Instead, producers, camera crews, and sometimes the performers who are waiting for their turns make noises behind the set. I understand that they are trying their best to keep the usual broadcast, but while some countries are broadcasting news from newscasters’ houses, it seems a bit strange to me how people are still gathering in studios.
Post a Comment