One day, while working in my dad’s office during the summer of 2008, he asked me to look up a clip from “Deliverance” (1972). Instead of finding the clip, I discovered the full-length movie, legal and free, nestled in the arms of the warmest place on the Internet: Hulu. My dad and I looked at each other, knowing that we had just discovered every movie buff’s dream.
I had no idea the speed at which Internet viewing would advance or the sheer variety of television shows and films that would become available over the next few years. With options like Hulu, Netflix and Crackle — not to mention shadier streaming or file-sharing sites — Internet cinemas have quickly superseded physical movie-renting plants like Blockbuster. With all of this happening at such great speed, I have hardly been able to slow down and ask if this development is a good thing.
The Hulu television advertisements joke about the site turning your brain to mush for Alec Baldwin-clad aliens to slurp, but from my experience, this is only about half a step away from the mark. For instance, take Netflix’s original shows, all immediately available in a delicious lumped sum of brain-melting programming. I am sure that I am not the only one convalescing from a weekend “House of Cards” binge.
Additionally, many cable providers, as well as HBO, now offer various on demand services. The influx of quality programming — anytime, anywhere — is undeniably convenient. However, I wonder how healthy this electronic binge behavior is for both the viewer and the stories.
It goes without saying that any sort of binging can be unhealthy. However, on a campus with substantially bigger fish to fry when it comes to having too much too fast, media binging is understandably overlooked. However, it can and does take a toll. Holing up for hours at a time cannot be good for one’s mental health. Neglecting schoolwork is incredibly easy — “just another episode” (combined with Netflix’s particularly evil autoplay feature) can quickly dissolve into an entire season. Attention spans also suffer, as even the best show can seem repetitive after eight episodes.
Despite the obvious ways it can affect the viewer personally, I think binge-watching also has a significant effect on content as a whole. Constant availability, as well as the power to pause and rewind as often as needed, has undermined the onus shows put on their audiences. Any missed line can be re-watched, at least in theory. While I intend to go back to an episode to see what I missed, I get lazy. A plot development catches my eye, and I move forward with a show that I’m barely watching. In addition, any post-episode deliberation is sacrificed for the immediate reward of another episode.
In these ways, binge-watching seems to undermine everything I love about television: its character development, nuance and thought-provoking nature. While television has gradually become more of a medium for movie-esque dramas and comedies, not laugh-track sitcoms, some shows are catering to a half-interested, distracted audience. Sitcoms like “Roseanne” and “I Love Lucy” used to provide an entertaining backdrop for another activity, with their laugh tracks clueing the audience in to parts it may have missed and their simple, slow-progressing storylines giving a pass to divided attention spans. Today, the same thing is happening, at least online.
Maybe television will never be the art form I want and know it can be. Despite my lust for online options, these offerings are doing a disservice to both shows and audiences.
