Valck, Marijke deTeurlings, Jan2020-02-172020-02-1720139789048518678https://mediarep.org/handle/doc/14278Television as we knew it is irrevocably changing. Some are gleefully announcing the death of television, others have been less sanguine but insist that television is radically changing underneath our eyes. Several excellent publications have dealt with television's uncertain condition, but few have taken the specific question of what television's transformations mean for the discipline of Television Studies as a starting point. The essays collected in this volume aim to fill this void. Two fundamental questions string the various contributions together. First, is television really in crisis or is the present not so extraordinary when revisiting television's development? Second, should we invent new theoretical concepts or are our old ones still perfectly relevant? To answer such questions the authors in this volume take up diverse case studies, ranging from the academic series Reading Contemporary Television to Flemish Fiction, from nostalgic programming on broadcast television to YouTube, from tell-sell television shows to public television art in the 1980s.<ul> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13250'>Marijke de Valck and Jan Teurlings: <i>After the Break. Television Theory Today</i></a></li> </ul> <h4>Part I: Questioning the crisis</h4> <ul> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13252'>Herbert Schwaab: <i>‘Unreading’ contemporary television</i></a></li> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13253'>Joke Hermes: <i>Caught. Critical versus everyday perspectives on television</i></a></li> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13254'>Alexander Dhoest: <i>The persistence of national TV. Language and cultural proximity in Flemish fiction</i></a></li> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13255'>William Uricchio: <i>Constructing television. Thirty years that froze an otherwise dynamic medium</i></a></li> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13256'>Judith Keilbach and Markus Stauff: <i>When old media never stopped being new. Television’s history as an ongoing experiment</i></a></li> </ul> <h4>Part II: New paradigms</h4> <ul> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13257'>Jan Teurlings: <i>Unblackboxing production. What media studies can learn from actor-network theory</i></a></li> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13258'>Mark Hayward: <i>Convergence thinking, information theory and labour in ‘end of television’ studies</i></a></li> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13259'>Juan Francisco Gutiérrez Lozano: <i>Television memory after the end of television history?</i></a></li> </ul> <h4>Part III: New concepts</h4> <ul> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13260'>José van Dijck: <i>YouTube beyond technology and cultural form</i></a></li> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13261'>Margot Bouman: <i>Move along folks, just move along, there’s nothing to see. Transience, televisuality and the paradox of anamorphosis</i></a></li> <li><a href='http://dx.doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/13263'>Mimi White: <i>Barry Chappell’s Fine Art Showcase. Apparitional TV, aesthetic value, and the art market</i></a></li> </ul>engCreative Commons Attribution Non Commercial No Derivatives 3.0 GenericFernsehenMedientheorieTelevisionmedia theory79110.26530/OAPEN_44511910.25969/mediarep/13356