qi and it crowd, the only shows on tv. ever.

Section A Institutions: QI  

Institutional context for QI:

• QI is shown on  Dave. The brand identity of this channel is very manly and genial. A channel called 'Dave' certainly doesn't target anyone other than men with fragile masculinities. They changed from UKTV G2 (a very unmemorable and boring name) to Dave, an actual boring name, because "everyone knows a bloke called Dave"

 • Dave's mission statement is to 'inform, educate and entertain' and QI does all three

 • It's required to show re-runs at more obscure times, like 3:45am, which it does

 • The media channels’/stations’ target audiences is primarily 18-40 year old white men. This is reflected in its panel choice, that apart from the occasional female comedienne (usually Jo Brand), the panel is composed of middle aged white men. 

Section A Institutions: THE IT CROWD 

Institutional context for The IT Crowd:

• IT Crowd is shown on Channel 4. The brand identity of this channel is to provide TV for people who don't have enough of it. It's the fourth channel ever on British terrestrial TV after the Broadcasting Act of 1980. 

 • Channel 4's ethos is much in like with the BBC's; to inform, educate and entertain. But it's not AS popular so it can get away with some risk-taking. As such, they broadcast a show about a dysfunctional IT department of a company that explores nerd culture and growing technology. Still, it has a laugh track and its jokes are very obvious, but at least it's deviating from a norm. Big Bang theory did this later. 

 •  The media channels’/stations’ target audiences is EVERYONE. Literally it's the fourth channel on TV. By that logic, it's the fourth most popular, so it has to appeal to EVERYONE. 

it crowd.

I don't like canned laughter. At all. Woody Allen summed it up in Annie Hall. 

Rob (To Alvy): We do the show live in front if an audience. 

Alvy: Great, but nobody laughs 'cause your jokes aren't funny. 

Rob: Yeah, well, that's why this machine is dynamite. 

That sums it up for me. Canned laughter is a sign that you should be laughing, but you aren't. It's forced. A good comedy makes you laugh because it's funny, but a lazy comedy has to indicate when you should be laughing. It's what put me off Friends, it's what put me off Big Bang Theory (along with a bunch of other stuff I wont get into), and it was what initially put me off The IT Crowd. The bulk of the humour in  The IT Crowd revolves around making fun of Chris O'Dowd's and Richard Ayoade's socially awkward, introverted man-children and all their cringy social encounters, and Katherine Parkinson's computer illiteracy and her incongruity in an IT department.  

Richard Ayoade is always funny, but the actual jokes are often slapstick, much like 'good old-fashioned comedy', as in it's very obvious and heavy-handed lacking subtlety and wit. From I've seen, the plots twists and turns are dictated by how deep the introverts can dig themselves into the pit of social awkwardness, channelling the Mariana Trench, but it can sometimes be funny or at least mildly humorous. There is always potential comedy in three people who know little about social interactions indulging in social interactions. 

As far as introverts go, there are a wide range of introverts that The IT Crowd depicts, unlike The Big Bang Theory which simply depicts all nerds and basement-dwelling troglodytes. There's the buttoned-up, 31-but-lives-with-his-mum stereotypically geeky type, the lazy, sloppy, poorly-dressed introvert with the work ethic of an overweights house-cat with no legs, and the obligatory woman character who has to be grouped with these nerds, but is no more introverted than them. She may be a Luddite, but is mainly independent who doesn't fall to gender conventions like many other Luddite-esque women. It's mostly obvious and silly, but it make me laugh quite a few times, so if it's intention was to make me laugh, then it succeeds as a comedy, I guess.

QI audience pleasures.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMVyrajcgLM&channel=DeanWashburnGuitar

I watched a clip of a QI show where they discuss the positive psychological effects of shouting the name of the thing you're looking for in aid of finding the thing. The audience pleasures stem from the panelists misinterpreting the scientific study and placing a comedic spin on it. For example, when Fry said that saying the name of whatever you lost helps you find it, like 'toaster' or 'wallet', one panelist misinterpreted that as saying the items given name, like Mark or Peregrine. The humour isn't scripted or planned, but rather feels like table talk, or "sombremesa", where panelists share their personal experiences which bear superficial resemblance to the topic in hand. It's comparable to if you've finished a meal with a group of friends and are still at the table indulging in light conversation. At least that's the impression I get with QI.

It doesn't blend information with humour so much as it briefly mentions information for which humour can stem off of it. It doesn't spend too long focusing on the science side, since most proletariat BBC viewers lose interest in anything vaguely discerning without the addition of light humour. Although I imagine if you spend a good few weeks dedicating yourself solely to QI, I imagine you will gain a few IQ points on the way. Stephen Fry is a genial, quick-witted man and Alan Davies is his slow-witted counterpart, often recieving the butt of the intelligent jokes brought his way.