Kelsey Sanders
A Rhetorical Analysis of Andrew Romano’s “Why You’re Addicted to TV”
With the rise of the popularity of television, the landscape of television shows
has changed along with the change of audience. Andrew Romano’s “Why You’re
Addicted to TV” explores the upsurge in what he deems “hyperserial” television
shows. Such television allows an audience to become addicted to the overload of a
never ending plot line where “traditional” television shows did not require the
audience watching episodes in order to understand the plot. Romano’s arguments
for television addiction center on pathos as he connects with the audience at a
personal level by his own experiences and hilarious metaphors. These appeals to the
audience interweave with the author’s credentials and arguments of the new
generation of “hyperserials” with examples of his favorite TV shows, such as Game of
Thrones and Lost, and by scientific evidence.
Television has become not only an art but a science as well, mastered by the
directors and writers of what society considers great television shows today.
Romano immediately brings in the reader with his opening statements about the
most popular TV shows that will probably “define this particular moment in
television history.” As these said television shows are booming in society, most
likely, the reader will have at least one favorite from those shows mentioned and
become curious as to what Romano could say about their beloved show. Romano
continues to clue the audience into the ideas of the minds who create these TV
shows who deliberately create the bingeing situations everyone has fallen into when
becoming hooked to a TV show. However, Romano explains that it is not just the
“business story” of “new technologies and new modes of distribution” but “about the
science of storytelling itself.” We, as an audience, are not only under the influence of
the puppet hand of those who just want money, but also hijacked by our own bodies,
as “bingeing… is how our brains want to watch television.” Romano introduces this
statement at the beginning of the article to clearly define the logic behind the
presented arguments. He breaks the news of the betrayal that our own bodies cause
to the internal struggle of wanting to be productive but also needing to watch our
new favorite TV show for hours. We are told as an audience that it is not only our
fault but come to the conclusion that we do not really have any immediate control
over the addiction. This statement creates two polarized feelings for the reader.
First, the reader feels a slight sigh of relief as our guilty pleasure has a scientific
basis and we feel a justification or an excuse for why we do binge on television. On
the opposite side of the spectrum, the reader feels used and manipulated by those
who know how our brains tick. Romano knows that the reader will want to keep
reading to see if there will be given a reason to feel better for the said manipulation.
To keep from alienating the audience, Romano includes his own personal
experiences with these “hyperserialized” shows and does so in a comedic air by
stating, “my name is Andrew, and I am a Lost-aholic.” He continues to explain how
his addiction evolved from watching one episode to watching “120 episodes…in
about 30 days.” Not only does this allow the audience to connect with Romano at a
personal level but this allows Romano to continue on with subtle jabs at the
“helpless” who are controlled by “Golden Age…successors” without angering his
audience as he has now included himself with the reader. He creates a critical
environment about TV shows without alienating the audience by including himself
in the masses of “otherwise reasonable [people]” who do not understand what
happened to the seven hours of their day after watching a whole season of a new
show. Any assessment of the audience is also a critique of the author himself, which
makes the jabs tolerable in the eyes of the reader. Romano utilizes another of his
addictions, Game of Thrones, to explain how addictive he has become personally to
TV and thus increases his connection to the audience to be able to establish his
ethos later on in the article.
After creating the connection with the audience, Romano provides scientific
and technologic reasons for the “appeal of serialized shows and the recent rise of
binge watching.” The utilization of scientific evidence is instrumental for Romano’s
argument to be plausible and accepted by the audience and logical for the
progression of the article. Romano mentions scientific studies, includes quotes from
respected professors, and explanations of brain activity that is a direct appeal to his
credentials. From mentions of “alpha waves” and hypnosis metaphors, the audience
immediately recognizes that Romano not only knows what he is talking about but he
has furthered his knowledge with research. Besides an appeal to Romano’s ethos,
this scientific evidence was perfectly presented in the middle of Romano’s article
after he states his central thesis and establishing a connection with the audience. As
a pawn of hyperserialized shows, the audience once again can feel justified in being
a couch potato as Romano states how new technologies in the advancement of
viewing opportunities in video-on-demand and internet streaming. Romano is able
to weave an argument around bingeing that is the fault of many—the audience,
brain functions, and technology—which allows the tone of the article to be nonjudgmental to resonate with the audience.
Unique to this article, Romano’s establishes his ethos very subtly and without
much flare. Romano’s expertise on this subject comes from his personal
experiences, his research of scientific studies, and his interviews with scientists and
television show directors. The fact that he does not bombard the audience with why
he is right and you should listen to him; he presents his ethos by utilizing the logos
of his article. With statistics ranging from how many Americans religiously watch a
TV show years ago compared to now and “How People Watch TV on Delay,” Romano
convinces the audience of the rise of “hyperserialization” is not only because of
business but because of our brains loving the cliffhangers and movements shown by
the actors and camera angles. Romano proceeds into explaining just why we as an
audience find TV so addicting. Since he has already caught the audience’s attention
and convinced the reader of his ethos, the reader metaphorically eats up the all
reasons why we can justify our guilty pleasure of addictive TV. Near the end of the
article, the author brings in specific examples from Game of Thrones to explain why
we “[devote] so much time to TV….[because] it feels good.” Romano’s rationalization
of Robert Kubey and Mihaly Cskiszentmihayli’s “orienting response” explains the
hypnosis that the audience feels when watching popular and favorite television
shows for hours on end because of the director’s complete control of what and how
we watch the story proceed.
The audience feels exactly what the directors and writers want the audience
to feel and knowing this, hyperserialization happens to the point where we can
immediately access TV shows for hours on end, such as House of Cards, and in the
future, be able to “choose your own adventure” for TV. By utilizing how Romano
personally feels after watching Lost and Game of Thrones, Romano is able to form a
“safe space” for the audience to reevaluate their addictions to television shows and
the future of television.