No abstract

No abstract

Social statistics show marked changes in roles and norms associated with fatherhood in U.S. society over time. This quantitative content analysis examines whether TV content has kept pace with such changes through the analysis of depictions of the father character and his interactions with children in the family-oriented situation comedy genre. In all, 578 scenes from 34 top-rated U.S. family-oriented sitcoms from 1980 through 2017 are examined to explore the depiction of the father character over time. Changes in the depiction of the father as foolish approached significance by decade but were not linear. No change occurred in proportion of humorous exchanges in which fathers were the butt of the joke. Interestingly, fathers interacted less frequently with children in key parenting behaviors, and such interactions became more likely to show the father as humorously foolish in some more recent decades compared with sitcoms from previous decades. Working class fathers were not found to be more foolishly depicted than fathers from other class positions. Implications for audiences through the lenses of social-cognitive theory and cultivation theory are discussed. Public Policy Relevance StatementSocial statistics indicate that today's fathers take a more active and involved role in parenting compared with fathers of the past. This study, a content analysis of father characters appearing in U.S. family-oriented sitcoms from 1980 to 2017, shows TV depictions are often in sharp contrast to these real-world shifts. Over time, sitcom fathers are generally engaging less frequently in key parenting interactions and more frequently parenting in a manner that can be described as "humorously foolish" compared with sitcom fathers of the past.

We look at long lists (i.e., longer than three parts) in political discourse, especially in talk shows from three cultures, the U.S., Pakistan, and the Netherlands, and ask how a long list is accomplished. Long lists are routinely produced in political discourse by extending the typical three-part list. The listing process to create a long list can happen in many ways, explicitly via counting verbally or physically and implicitly through other resources. These resources can also be used to project a list in advance and to create one retrospectively. Last, listing in politics creates two problems for the lister, requiring an artful application of the available listing resources. The audience may orient to only three parts, and the politician is faced with selecting the last item. Thus, we show that politicians use lists to structure their talk, but they also have to anticipate problems regarding the practice of listing.

No abstract