Politics or pleasure: Functionally illiterate audience
motivations and gratifications of television viewing
Wieke Rutgers Student number: 10264477
Master’s Thesis
Graduate School of Communication
Master’s programme Communication Science / Political Communication Thesis supervisor: Dr. Marjolein Moorman
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the orientations of functionally illiterate television audience members and their acquisition of politics-related information via that medium. Television has the potential to inform this hard-to-reach part of the electorate about politics-related
information, and to stimulate the political awareness and the inclusion in democratic
processes. This study qualitatively explored the motivations of functionally illiterate audience members for watching television, and the gratifications obtained from it, by performing in-depth interviews with seven functionally illiterate persons.The study gained understanding of the political information the respondents see on television as well as other media and
communication channels. The results seem to indicate that the functionally illiterate people use television to gratify multiple needs, such as escaping from daily life, obtaining
conversation material, and developing themselves personally. Furthermore, for many of the respondents, television is the preferred medium for gratifying surveillance needs and acquiring political information. The study advanced on existing theories of audience orientations by suggesting adapted categories of gratifications which are based on functionally illiterate television viewers. In order to pave the way to improving politics-related information transfer to functionally illiterate people, media researchers are faced with the challenge of discovering which type of television content affects the viewer’s absorption of information most effectively.
Key words: functional illiteracy, television, uses and gratification research, political information, grounded theory
Table of Contents
Introduction ... 4
Theoretical Background ... 7
Functional illiteracy ... 7
Uses and Gratifications Research ... 7
Gratification categories of television audiences ... 8
Gratifications sought and obtained ... 10
Political Information on Television ... 11
Methodology ... 13 Grounded theory ... 13 Respondents ... 14 Interview procedure ... 15 Analysing procedure ... 16 Results ... 18
Motivations and Gratifications ... 18
Diversion ... 19
Personal relationships ... 21
Personal identity ... 22
Surveillance ... 23
Obtaining Political Information ... 24
Political information on television ... 25
Political information through other media sources ... 26
Conclusion and Discussion ... 29
References ... 35
Tables... 38
Introduction
Political information is to democratic politics what money is to economics: it is the currency of citizenship. (Delli Carpini & Keeter, 1996, p. 8)
It is important to realise that the privilege of being able to read this text, and the privilege for me to write it, is not as common as you might expect. In the Netherlands alone, approximately 2.5 million citizens do not have the required reading and writing capabilities to exert a functional life within society (Algemene Rekenkamer, 2016). These people are
‘functionally illiterate’, a term that will be further explained in the next chapter. The lack in literal abilities complicates their chances to meaningfully participate both in their private and professional lives.
For the functioning of the democracy, the Netherlands would benefit from a politically well-informed electorate. According to Blumler and Coleman (2015), democracy functions best with a ‘collective self-determination’. In order to reach this collective civility, all parts of society should have access to reliable information and should have a meaningful choice in political decisions. In the Netherlands, 12.9 million citizens are qualified to vote (CBS, 2017). Therefore, with as much as 2.5 million people who experience difficulties with the simplest written texts, it is worthwhile to explore the mechanisms of reaching and informing this part of the electorate.
The increasing amount of digitalized information and communication channels poses many problems for functionally illiterate citizens. Information on the internet is to a large extent textual, and it can only be accessed with the required digital capabilities which are, in turn, dependent on literal abilities (Baay, Buisman, & Houtkoop, 2015). For this reason, literacy is an important indicator for the digital divide (Ünver, 2016).
Television, as opposed to internet and print media, offers visual and oral information that is accessible to a larger audience as it overcomes hurdles of literacy and verbal skills (Graber, 1990). Furthermore, it is a great medium for ‘falling into’ rather than ‘jumping into’ news,which has positive implications for informing, educating and mobilizing the lesser interested and informed electorate (Aarts & Semetko, 2003). In contrast to digital and print media, television has the ability of pulling in audiences from all directions, and as a result, informing a large and diverse portion of the population, of which a considerable share would perhaps not follow news through other sources that require more effort from the audience member (Aarts & Semetko, 2003). Consequently, television would possibly be the most effective medium to inform functionally-illiterate people.
Thus, the objective of this research is to discover functionally illiterate people’s use of television for obtaining political information, by advancing on existing theories of audience orientations. Interviews were held with functionally illiterate people in order to get insights on their gratifications of watching television. Additionally, the respondents were asked if and how they acquire political information from the television and other media, in order to discover whether television is capable of informing this part of the electorate.
This research topic is hardly addressed in prior studies. To my knowledge,
functionally illiterate audience orientations and media effects have merely been studied in relation to health communication and consumer marketing (cf. Viswanathan, Rosa, & Harris, 2005; Weiss, Reed, & Kligman, 1994). Furthermore, research on television audience
orientations and motivations to watch televised political information are present (cf. Aarts & Semetko, 2003; Graber, 2001; Strömbäck, 2017; Wenner, 1983), but not in relation to this specific audience. Finally, many governments and organizations work on enabling the functionally illiterate electorate to vote by developing voting ballots with images and logo’s (Reynolds & Steenbergen, 2006), and by allowing assistance during voting (ACE, 2013), but
there is little focus on actually providing this portion of the electorate with the required political knowledge to make a meaningful and well-considered voting decision. With this study, I aim to provide meaningful ‘first’ insights of this audience’s television use and their acquisition of political information via this and other media.
The next section provides and describes the framework that was used to guide this study. It also contains a detailed definition of functional illiteracy, an explanation on the Uses and Gratifications research tradition that was used in this study, and an indication of political information presented on television and how audiences potentially look at this. The research questions are also presented throughout the next section. In the methodology section, the interview process, data collection and analysis methods are explained. In the results section the data on the interviews and analysis of the interviews are presented. The final section presents the conclusions and limitations of this study, as well as suggestions on new topics for future research and implications for televised political information.
Theoretical Background
Functional illiteracy
In most developed countries, ‘pure’ illiteracy (i.e. the inability to read and write in any language) is almost completely absent. Developed countries show a basic literacy rate of 98.8% on average, whereas developing countries show a significantly lower pure literacy rate of 68.2% on average (UNESCO, 2008). However, the rates of functional literacy show considerable lower numbers, also in developed countries. By definition, functional literacy is the required level of literacy and numeracy to function adequately in society (Agee, 2005; Viswanathan et al., 2005; Wallendorf, 2001). The skill level of writing and reading required to be ‘functionally literate’ is dependent on context; in developed countries, higher literacy skills are required to function adequately in society (Wallendorf, 2001). According to Agee (2005) the information society we currently live in asks for higher literacy skills to effectively participate: “Our world is changing so rapidly that new technologies drive the need for
improvement of old skill sets such as reading. Literacy itself has evolved to more than simply reading and writing.” (p. 246).
Limited literate abilities potentially affect the use of media and communication channels and also the responses to that media. In order to discover how and why the functionally illiterate respondents of this study watch television, the ‘uses and gratification approach’ (hereafter abbreviated U&G) was chosen to guide this study.
Uses and Gratifications Research
Since the early 1940’s, U&G research has been one of the most prominent traditions within media effects research. U&G is a qualitative research method that traditionally attempts to explain the way in which individuals make use of mass communication, among other resources, as a way of gratifying certain needs and to achieve certain goals (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitz, 1973). The essential goal of U&G research is to gain understanding of
how to communicate better and to learn about unintended consequences of messages (Klapper, as cited in Ruggiero, 2000).
The U&G tradition generally focuses on the individual motivations for and
gratifications of media, i.e. the gratifications sought and the gratifications obtained from the use of any media system (Ruggiero, 2000). U&G research is, therefore, more focused on the sociological and psychological factors determining media use of individuals, than in
developing theories about the effects of mass communications (Lowery & DeFleur, as cited in Ruggiero, 2000).
U&G research can be medium-specific or content-specific, or it can study the motivations and gratifications of distinct audiences. Examples of U&G research include a comparative study of media use among adolescents of different ethnicities (Gerson, 1966), a research on college students’ motivations for watching soap operas (Rubin, 1985), and a study of audience conceptualizations of the Late Night with David Letterman television show
(Schaefer & Avery, 1993). Albarran, Anderson, Bejar, and Bussart (2007) examined decreasing radio audiences among young adults and Kaye and Johnson (2002) investigated motivations for web use for collecting political information. All these studies focused on the gratifications of diverse audiences of diverse media systems, and contributed to the U&G tradition by suggesting new types of audience orientations or by identifying changes in audience motivations due to shifts in the media landscape.
Gratification categories of television audiences
U&G theorists aim to discover a wide range of social functions that mass
communication systems can conform to. McQuail, Blumler, and Brown (1972) suggested a set of four gratification categories of television viewing: diversion, personal relationships, personal identity, and surveillance. These categories have given direction within U&G
research since the 1970s, have been adopted in studies with other media types than television, and were used to guide this study:
Diversion. This first gratification category has traditionally been composited of three subcategories: ‘escape from the constraints of routine’, ‘escape from the burdens of problems’, and ‘emotional release’ (McQuail et al., 1972). Television can be used in order to escape the constraints of routine by temporarily occupying an attractive fantasy world. It can furthermore be used to escape and forget personal worries and temporarily get away from problems. Finally, it can be used to find relieve of emotions of any kind. The viewer can be moved to tears, laughter, excitement, etc., which can also be explained as experiencing disconnection from the world by means emotional release.
Personal relationships. This category is identified by the audience gratifications of forming or maintaining relationships with other people (McQuail et al., 1972). Originally, this gratification was subdivided in ‘companionship’ and ‘social utility’. Companionship is the process in which the audience member enters a relationship with television personalities or uses the the medium itself as company, and social utility is explained as the viewer’s use of television content as conversational material. Personal identity. This category refers to the motivations of audiences to find
connections between own life situations and television content. The subcategories identified by McQuail et al. (1972) are ‘personal reference’, ‘reality exploration’, and ‘value reinforcement’. Personal reference means the reflection of own characteristics to those seen on television, reality exploration is the understanding of personal experiences better after seeing them on television, and value reinforcement is to see values on television that are important to the viewer too.
Surveillance. This category can be explained as acquiring information and opinions about events happening in the wider world of public affairs and are less directed at personal problems or situations (McQuail et al., 1972). Originally, this gratification was not subdivided in underlying categories.
In order to satisfy those needs, audiences can use multiple mass communication channels, or seek to obtain them within one media system. McQuail et al. (1972) opted that personal circumstances could influence the viewer’s use of television for one or multiple gratifications: “People who, for whatever reason, lack access to multiple communication sources are much less functionally specific in their use of television; for them it is much more of an all-purpose medium.” (McQuail et al., 1972, p. 163). One expectation of this research is that functionally illiterate people do not have access to an extended amount of media systems, as a result of their limited literate capabilities, and therefore, television functions as an all-purpose medium for this audience.
Gratifications sought and obtained
Palmgreen and Rayburn (1979) introduced the distinction between gratifications sought (motivations) and gratifications obtained (satisfactions) and were focused on
discovering meaningful connections between them. Within U&G research, it is important to consider the parallelism or discrepancy between the gratifications audience members seek in mass communication, and the gratifications they obtain, in order to discover whether mass communication channels effectively satisfy audiences’ needs. Palmgreen and Rayburn (1979) demonstrated that that actively seeking to satisfy certain needs occasionally leads to
disappointing effects when the gratifications obtained were less than hoped for. Conversely, passive television viewing (without a hard-set sought gratification)often leads to more obtained gratifications than the viewer desires.
The current study explores both the gratifications sought and gratifications obtained. The four categories suggested by McQuail et al. (1972) will provide an initial framework for this study, and it will be further explored whether these gratification categories are relevant for functionally illiterate television viewers, or whether an adapted set of categories or underlying subcategories is more suitable for explaining this audience’s television gratifications. This leads to:
Research Question 1: What motivates functionally illiterate people to watch television?
Research Question 2: What gratifications do functionally illiterate people obtain from watching television?
Political Information on Television
As was mentioned in the introduction, television has the potential to inform lesser educated audiences who lack the abilities to acquire information from other sources. According to Graber (2001), the acquisition of political knowledge among low-educated members of the electorate, is mainly through the medium of television:
Systematic comparisons of learning about important political issues in national and international politics show that television coverage yields significantly more
information gain than newspaper reading for unfamiliar issues that may be difficult to imagine. For many adults who are deficient in verbal comprehension and reading skills, audio-visual learning is by far the most significant source of knowledge acquisition through life. (Graber, 2001, p. 31)
Thus, it is relevant to gain insights on whether the respondents of this study use television with the purpose to discover news and political information or acquire it by accident through the medium.
The conceptualization of ‘political information on television’ in this study, is broad in the sense that it incorporates all televised politics-related content (e.g. policy news,
politicians, governmental decisions). As this is a qualitative research, there will not be made a distinction between information found in current affairs programs, talk shows, news
programs, etc., because they all have the potential to contain political information (albeit in varying degrees of quality and quantity). In practical sense, what the respondents exemplify as being televised political information will be explored. The effect of televised content on the respondents was not tested, and therefore, information on the specific nature of the content was not required.
The next aim of this research is to discover whether functionally illiterate people use television to be informed about politics and, if this is not one of their motivations, whether the acquisition of political information is an unintended obtained gratification. This leads to:
Research Question 3a: Is the acquisition of political information a motivation for functionally illiterate people for watching television (if yes, what are the specific needs they seek to gratify when watching this content)?
Research Question 3b: Do functionally illiterate people indicate to (un)intendedly obtain political information through watching television?
Finally, I am interested in whether other media than television are used to learn about politics. Therefore, the respondents were asked if they use other media for gratifying surveillance needs and to find political information, or whether they unintendedly gratify those needs.
Research Question 4a: Do functionally illiterate people seek to gratify surveillance needs or to acquire political information through other media than television? Research Question 4b: Do functionally illiterate people indicate to (un)intendedly
obtain political information or gratify surveillance needs through other media than television?
Methodology
To reiterate, the purpose of this study is to (research question 1) discover the
motivations functionally illiterate people have for watching television, (research question 2) discover the resulting gratifications from watching television, (research question 3) to find out whether television is used to by respondents with in search of political information or if they obtain it accidentally through the medium, and (research question 4) to discover whether other media are used by the respondents in search of political information or if they see it
accidentally. A qualitative study with semi-structured interviews following the rules of grounded theory was executed to investigate this.
Grounded theory
Grounded theory (Corbin & Strauss, 1990) was used to design the set-up of the interviews with respondents. Respondents in grounded theory research are not random samples but selected individuals or groups of individuals that meet specific requirements. In grounded theory, phenomena are not conceived as static but as continually changing in response to prevailing conditions (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). Grounded theory seeks to develop method and theory by investigating these changes. Furthermore, grounded theory seeks to determine how actors in the study respond to conditions and explore the
consequences of their actions. In grounded theory, the data collection and analysis are interrelated processes, which means that analysis begins as soon as the first bit of data is collected. The following interviews can, as a result, be adapted to further advance the data collection if needed. Similarities and differences between the concepts found during data analysing should be looked for in order to develop categories that will form the basis of a developing theory. For a more detailed overview of the structure of a grounded theory research and the steps involved see Corbin and Strauss (1990).
Respondents
A representative group of respondents was approached via a language course
organised by Stichting Prago. This foundation organises evening reading and writing courses at 17 locations throughout the Netherlands. The classes are attended by adult functionally illiterate people who have not successfully finished primary and/or secondary education and are looking to develop literacy abilities. After a meeting of getting acquainted with teachers and students of the classes, I attended six Monday and Thursday classes between 13
November and 18 December 2017 for the interviews.
The exact cause and nature of the respondents’ limited literary abilities was irrelevant for this study. An important requirement of the respondents was their ability of speaking the Dutch language fluently. The students were asked whether they would be willing to answer some questions about watching television, and political habits and attitudes. Eventually 7 respondents were selected, of which 5 had a Dutch background, and 2 had a migration background. The interviewees were asked about their age, gender, and occupation, to establish demographics (Table 1).
Table 1. Respondent demographics (names are coded for privacy reasons)
Name Gender Age Occupation Political interest* Vote
Michael Male 24 Unemployed Average No
Mounir Male 27 Day care Low Yes
Hans Male 54 Volunteer work at UW** Very low No
Joost Male 67 Dry cleaning and language ambassador***
Very high Yes Bart Male 56 Forklift driver and language
ambassador
Low Only during last
elections Femke Female 56 Volunteer at a healthcare facility
for demented elderly people
High Yes
Willemijn Female 47 Stock clerk in a supermarket Very low No * Indication of political interest compared to the average interest in the group.
** UW is an organisation that helps people who are distanced from the job market.
*** Language ambassadors are volunteers that stimulate functional illiteracy awareness in the Netherlands (in service of Stichting Lezen & Schrijven).
Furthermore, also the political interest of all respondents were scored and compared to the average political interest in the group (fifth column Table 1). The scoring was established from answers respondent gave on questions about their knowledge of the Dutch government and political parties, and related with how often they reported to follow political information on television and other media. The fifth column, therefore, demonstrate that Willemijn and Hans are least interested in politics and Joost most. The last column provides information on the voting behaviour.
Interview procedure
Studying functionally illiterate people poses some challenges. Illiteracy can be the cause of emotional stress and it goes along with feelings of humiliation, which can result in aversion to talk about the topic. It was decided that in-depth interviews would be the best technique to overcome these limitations. The interviewees were not directly asked about their literal abilities, but they were welcomed to address those themselves. When occasionally the questions were misinterpreted, the interview style allowed for rephrasing the question, which often resulted in informative answers from the respondents.
An interview guide with a total of 63 mostly open-ended questions was developed to get insights on the respondents’ television habits, motivations and gratifications, and their use of other media and sources for (political) news. The complete interview guide can be found in Appendix A (p. 49-51).
The duration of the interviews was 30 to 60 minutes and they were roughly structured in three parts; the first part was focused on the television viewing habits of the interviewee (including their interest in watching television news and political programs), the second part focused on the other sources for news and political information they might use, and the third part focused on their political interest, knowledge and awareness.
I acquired their responses to the questions with the laddering technique, which has proven to be useful in qualitative research for understanding behaviours (Veludo‐de‐Oliveira, Ikeda, & Campomar, 2006). The laddering technique involves asking the interviewees to name specific characteristics they prefer about brands or products (in this research: television programs). The next step is to ask specific reasons for why these characteristics are preferred (Veludo‐de‐Oliveira et al., 2006). In this research the laddering technique was executed by continually asking ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions about the respondents’ motivations and
gratifications of television watching. This led to a better understanding about the respondents’ specific and sometimes subconscious motivations and gratifications of television viewing.
The four gratification categories of McQuail et al. (1972; see section on theoretical background) were used as a starting structure. The interview questions were posed as openly as possible without priming for answers, but when the respondents did not mention any of the four categories, I asked about them more directly for providing examples, always making sure to offer different options. Therefore, when needed, I asked questions such as: Do you watch television to cheer up? (diversion); Do you watch television to not feel alone? (personal relationships); Do you watch television to see motivational content or inspiring people? (personal identity); Do you watch television to see what happens in the world? (surveillance). The respondents’ television gratifications that did not meet the requirements of the
subcategories of McQuail et al. (1972) were carefully considered in order to redefine the traditional categories or create new subcategories. New descriptions and requirements of these subcategories are explained in the results section.
Analysing procedure
The interviews were audio recorded and transcribed, and eventually the transcripts were coded so that a structure could be found between the answers of the different
gratifications and motivations. These grouped answers allowed me to find the parallels and discrepancies between the respondents’ sought and obtained gratifications from watching television, which provided a basis for the revision of McQuail et al.’s (1972) gratification subcategories for functionally illiterate audience members.
The coding of the interviews started before all the data was collected. This allowed for minimally changing the successive interviews, by adding, deleting, or rephrasing questions, in order to get the most relevant results for the research topic following the Grounding theory procedure (see before).
Results
In the first part of this chapter, the sought and obtained television gratifications of the respondents of this study will be presented. The second half of this chapter will focus on the political information and political news the respondents mention to watch on television and via other media systems, and whether this is intended or appreciated by them or not.
Motivations and Gratifications
I categorized the quotes that represent the motivations and gratifications of the respondents and they are presented in Table 2 (Diversion, p. 38-39), Table 3 (Personal Relationships, p. 40-41), Table 4 (Personal Identity, p. 42), and Table 5 (Surveillance, p. 43-44). The gratifications sought are displayed in the third column, and the gratifications obtained in the fourth column. The quotes presented in the tables have been translated from Dutch to English as literally as possible to prevent the loss of intended meaning. The replies of the respondents were basis for the revision of the subcategories of McQuail et al.’s (1972) gratifications. The reported gratifications from respondents have been carefully evaluated and grouped into new subcategories, which can also be found in the tables. The suggested
reclassification is presented in Figure 1 for clarification, and will be carefully explained and illustrated with the respondents’ answers below.
Figure 1. Television gratification categories. McQuail et al.'s (1972) four main categories, with
revised underlying categories based on the findings of this research.
Diversion
The original diversion gratifications that were suggested by McQuail et al. (‘escape from the constraints of routine’, ‘escape from the burdens of problems’, and ‘emotional release’) have been revised into:
1. Relaxation. This gratification concerns the intended or obtained effect of
‘unwinding’ or ‘calming down’. As can be seen in rows 1 and 2 of Table 2, the respondents do not consciously intend to use television as a way to relax, but they did report relaxation as an unintended obtained gratification. Apparently, as the answers of Mounir and Bart signify, television has the ability to help them relax or calm down when they are stressed or when something is bothering them.
2. Pastime when bored. This slightly passive gratification is concerned with filling ‘empty’ time, for which the audience member has little other use. Apparently, television is an easy medium to turn to for most respondents when feeling bored. No direct gratifications obtained were mentioned by the respondents, as can be seen in rows 3-7 of Table 2. We can assume that if their motivation is boredom, television solves that and they have something to keep them busy. However, when their motivation is boredom, additional gratifications are usually obtained.
3. Habit. Habitual use of media might show little intentionality to seek any
gratifications, but the respondents indicated that the medium provides structure or comfort when it is used habitually. This gratification can be specified as automatic use that would be missed if it was not done. For Michael it helps him wake up in the mornings (Table 2, row 12) and for Joost it is pleasant to have it on as “radio with image” (Table 2, row 10). Like with gratifying boredom needs, specific obtained gratifications of habitual use were not mentioned by the respondents, but gratifications in other categories are obtained when watching
television habitually.
4. Entertainment and emotional response. The entertainment and emotional response gratification means the intended or obtained effect of evoking emotions such as joy or
sadness. As is visible in rows 13-17 of Table 2, the motivations of the respondents were often signified as looking for humour or happiness. Willemijn said to sometimes lose herself and cry from stories of true events and Joost said to occasionally be moved by television but that he has to be in ‘in the right mood’ for that. Upon asking Joost and Willemijn if they thought that sadness evoked by television was pleasant or not they both reported that it can be pleasant to let everything go. Furthermore, for Willemijn, Joost and Bart, television has the ability to cheer them up, and Michael, on the other hand, reported that television never has that effect on him.
5. Arousal. The gratifications that signify excitement responses to media belong to this category. For Bart, some programs can be exciting which leads him to stay and watch because “you just want to know how it ends” (Table 2, row 19) and for Mounir the interactivity of crime shows was reported to be exciting (Table 2, row 19). Femke only watches television to see sports, and this was very exciting to her. She said she needs to see how they skate and to feel hyper when seeing it (Table 2, rows 20-21).
6. Escape. This category inherits any motivations or effects of media use that involve losing the sense of time or space of the real world. Willemijn, for instance, reported to forget her surroundings as an automatic gratification obtained from watching television (Table 2, row 22), but she did not specify whether this escape (from problems or to a fantasy world) was one of her motivations for watching television. Michael reported to not at all use television for that effect (Table 2, row 22). Femke reported that watching sports leads her to feel distanced from her surroundings and that it is a welcome feeling (Table 2, row 23), but an unintended gratification.
Personal relationships
Apart from McQuail et al.’s (1972) original subcategories (‘companionship’ and ‘social utility’), the respondents of this study indicated that watching together to connect or watch more meaningfully was also a gratification. Therefore, the personal relationships gratifications that the respondents indicated to seek and obtain from watching television were divided into:
1. Companionship. This gratification indicates that a medium or the content on that medium can function as a companion. The medium was reported to be used as a companion when feeling alone by two of the respondents (Table 3, rows 1 and 3). Specifically, Joost said that he uses it as company when he experiences a sense of loneliness and whenever there is
silence in the house. The obtained gratification of Bart has to do with recognizing familiar people on television, which he reported as interesting and nice to see.
2. Social utility: watching together. The definition of this gratification is the function of television of bringing people together in front of the television. Watching together was mentioned by five respondents to be more pleasant than watching alone (Table 3, row 4-8). Hans said it is more fun to watch together and have a shared interest in that way, and Michael and Mounir said watching together is more entertaining than watching alone. Some
respondents, however, reported that watching alone is more relaxing because “Then you can watch programs of your own choice. That’s easy when you’re single, you don’t always have to… watch the crap of others.” (Joost, male, 67).
3. Social utility: conversation material. The definition of this gratification is, like the previous one, when television functions to bring people together, but in this case it is by providing material for conversations. Finding conversation material was not reported as a motivation for watching television by any of the respondents. However, it is an obtained gratification as four of the respondents said it occasionally happens that they talk about things seen on television with friends afterwards (Table 3, rows 9-12).
Personal identity
The three subcategories that McQuail et al. (1972) indicated as personal identity (‘personal reference’, ‘reality exploration’ and ‘value reinforcement’) were barely mentioned by the respondents in this study. From the responses of the interviewees I have combined the first and third subcategories of McQuail et al. (1972) into ‘relatable and motivational’ and added the new subcategory of ‘utility for personal life’.
1. Relatable and motivational. Seeking or finding any relatable content or people through media, which can inspire the viewer, is identified in this category. Relatable content or persons on television were identified by some respondents as a motivation for watching,
and for others it is exactly the opposite: an aspect they dislike about television (Table 4, rows 1-4). Especially Willemijn’s quotes signify her interest in relatable persons on television and she said they are a reason to keep watching. Upon the question whether media personalities they admire also stimulate them to change, Bart and Willemijn said they are interested in seeing them and would like to be more alike, but they do not pursue it (Table 4, rows 1 and 2).
2. Utility for personal life. Seeking or finding the tools to learn new skills through media use is seen as utility for personal life. Some respondents reported to use television as a tool to learn specific abilities that are useful or even important in their own life. Television, in a way, makes them evolve personally by expanding their skillset or knowledge. Willemijn learns how to perform minor medical procedures from a hospital series, and by watching a do-it-yourself television show, she learns how to make and repair objects in and around the house (Table 4, rows 5 and 6). She said to purposefully watch television in order to learn these things. Bart said to learn about assembling cars, which is meaningful to him because this is his greatest passion.
Surveillance
Originally, McQuail et al. (1972) did not divide the surveillance gratification in underlying subcategories. However, within this study it is fruitful to make a subdivision as their answers signify differences in their surveillance gratifications. Therefore, the revised subdivision is: ‘staying up to date’ and ‘in-depth information and explanation’.
1. Staying up to date. This is largely the original definition of surveillance: it is the gratification of being aware of what happens in the world. Some respondents reported not to follow news very attentively, but to value having at least some idea of what is happening in the world. The motivations for this subcategory are more outspoken than the obtained gratifications, as can be seen in rows 1-5 of Table 5. Three respondents also reported to
receive a negative feeling after watching television news. Fear and anger are reported to be emotions that are often evoked. However, these negative emotions were not reported to be reasons to avoid news broadcasts: “Yes, it really bothers me, and makes me angry. But I never regret it afterwards” (Willemijn), and “There is always misery… and it scares me. Something can happen at any moment. But you need to follow the news and whether it’s nearby or further away” (Bart).
2. In-depth information and explanation. In this subcategory television functions as an information source to either acquire more in-depth information or to further explain things that were previously unclear to the viewer. As can be seen from table 5 (rows 6-12), only motivations were recalled by the respondents. Bart said to find it important to have
information so that he can be more observant. Femke reported to occasionally listen to the radio, and when she hears of something particularly important, she moves to television for further explanation and to get a better idea of what has happened (Table 5, rows 8 and 9). Joost referred to his inability to read and write, and that television is his way of acquiring information that more literate people can read in newspapers or on the internet (Table 5, row 12). Sometimes the needs that the respondents sought to gratify were not obtained, which can also be seen in Table 5. Possibly, this is because some of the respondents indicated to have trouble absorbing the information from television. Even though they try to follow news broadcasts, the frequent use of complicated words and long sentences is occasionally causing misunderstandings. Thus, in this case the needs they seek to gratify are not always obtained.
Obtaining Political Information
The second part of this research aimed at discovering the respondents’ media gratifications in relation to political information. Table 6 (p. 45-48) displays respondents’ quotes of when they referred to seeing political information on television and through other
media. The table organizes the quotes into: gratifications sought (seeking political information) and gratifications obtained (coming across political information).
Political information on television
Research questions 3a and 3b of this research were focused on audience gratifications in combination with televised political information. The aim was to discover whether the acquisition of political information was a motivation to watch television and whether the respondents had more specific motivations to watch televised political information as well. Furthermore, I intended to discover whether political information was obtained from television and whether this followed from their intention to do so, or if they unintentionally acquired this information by coming across it on television.
Intentionally seeking political information. As is illustrated in rows 1-6 of Table 6, only Joost reported to actively use television in order to be informed about politics. His intention is to discover as much about politics as he can through television in order to know what the governments’ plans are and to be able to make a well-considered decision in elections. Even though he indicated to sometimes have difficulty understanding political information due to complex words and sentences (Table 6, row 4), he is still confident that television gives him all the information he needs to vote. He indicated that his inability to read complex texts does not negatively affect the acquisition of political information, because he can learn everything from television.
Unintendedly coming across political information. The other respondents said to come across political information occasionally when surfing across channels. However, when asked what the respondents consider political information or political content they only referred to television news broadcasts, and seem not to realize that political information can come up in other programs (such as talk shows) as well. Of the respondents who did not vote during the last elections (Hans, Willemijn, and Michael), Hans and Willemijn said not to have any
interest in following political news. As a result, they addressed to pay little attention when coming across political information on television. Michael, who has not voted because of political distrust, said to find political information interesting when governmental decisions could potentially influence his life directly. He furthermore indicated that political
information was easy to understand whenever he thought the topic was interesting, and to have a difficult time understanding it whenever the particular content of the message was uninteresting to him (Table 6, row 6). In his opinion it is not pragmatic to be disconcerted about politics, as there is nothing he can change. This same stance is shared by Hans, who chooses not to follow political information, because it has the potential of stressing him out. After being overworked, he chose to focus on himself and not to worry about things he cannot influence. As a result, he always changes the channel when seeing political information on television. Bart and Willemijn indicated to have trouble understanding the political
information they see on television and Bart said it was due to disinterest (Table 6, row 16).
Political information through other media sources
The fourth and final research questions (4a and 4b) focused on the respondents’ motivations and gratifications of obtaining political information and gratifying surveillance needs through other media than television. The surveillance needs were included in the interviews because news media occasionally contain political information.
1. Radio. In rows 17 to 20 of Table 6 some respondents indicated to occasionally listen to radio broadcasts. They all said to listen to music, and news or political information is merely some unintended interruption. Only Femke indicated that she tries to be informed about the political parties and their views during election times. Thus, political information and news are not sought gratifications but can be obtained gratifications from radio
2. Print media. Femke furthermore indicated to intentionally seek political
information during election times through leaflets and flyers (Table 6, row 21). She reported to have sufficient reading abilities to understand the information. Mounir said to come across pictures of politicians in newspapers, which he reported to find more informative than
information found through other media. He said that it was because: “I like seeing photos, people… You have to choose people that are really good in politics”, and photos helped him to decide when to trust politicians or not.
3. Conversations. Conversations with friends and family were indicated by the respondents to be the most popular channel to acquire (political) information apart from television. Most of them indicated that conversations about politics are accidental, when friends, family, or colleagues start the conversation (Table 6, row 24-27). Joost actively seeks political information through television (Table 6, rows 1-6), but turns to conversations with friends and family members when he deems the information acquired from television insufficient (as is often the case with information about municipal elections) (Table 6, row 28). Michael said to seek out conversations with friends whenever a certain political topic influences personal circumstances (Table 6, row 27). During the last elections of the House of Representatives in the Netherlands, Bart also voted, which was exceptional, as he normally abstains from voting. His decision to vote was based on information and advice from his colleagues, and he did not report to have acquired any information about the elections at that time through television or any other media.
4. Internet. Femke and Mounir indicated to use internet to find information (Table 6, rows 29 and 30), but Mounir said that it is not effective because “you can not find what you want to find” (see Table 6, row 29). Furthermore, Femke has looked for the so-called ‘Stemwijzer’ or ‘Kieswijzer’ on the internet. These tools offer political questions to be answered, for determining your political preferences and suggest political parties that share
the same ideas. The three respondents who reported to use Facebook said to occasionally see political information. Willemijn and Hans said to sometimes see news and political
information on their Facebook timelines, but choose not to look at it. Michael said to be aware of the inaccuracy of the information on Facebook, and therefore chooses not to take it seriously.
Conclusion and Discussion
In this study the gratifications Dutch functionally illiterate people seek and obtain from watching television were investigated and whether they use television and/or other media in order to acquire political information.
The first research questions aimed to discover the motivations of functionally illiterate people to watch television. The respondents of this study use television to be entertained, moved, aroused, comforted, and to temporarily escape their own world and problems.
Furthermore, television is used to find companionship and enrich relationships either with the device or with content it carries, or with family members and friends through the use of the device. Television was also used to see relatable or motivational content and to expand the skillset of the respondents. Finally, television fulfils surveillance gratifications, in the sense that they watch in order to know what happens in the world surrounding them, and to find explanation and in-depth information where the respondents need it. Each respondent of this research seeks to gratify multiple gratifications through television viewing, which seems to comply to McQuail et al.’s (1972) idea of television as an all-purpose medium. However, whether the multiplicity of sought gratifications through this one medium is due to their limited literate capabilities, remains unclear.
The second research question focused on discovering which gratifications functionally illiterate people obtain from watching television. Many of the previously stated gratifications that the respondents indicated to seek from television were also obtained. However, in some instances the gratifications obtained from watching television were not in line with the motivations. Relaxation and escape were often unintended, though not unpleasant, gratifications that the respondents obtained from watching television. Television content regularly resulted in conversation topics even though the respondents did not intend to find conversational material through watching television. Furthermore, television provides the
respondents with inspiration to develop themselves personally. Finally, the largest
discrepancies between gratifications sought and gratifications obtained were found within the surveillance category. The respondents intended to be up-to-date with the news and acquired more in-depth information and explanation, but were sometimes deceived in the sense that they did not understand the content, or because they quickly forgot it.
When reflecting these findings of the gratifications sought and obtained to McQuail et al.’s (1972) study of television audience orientations, they only partially comply to the
categories that they suggested. I found no empirical basis to dispute their four main categories (diversion, personal relationships, personal identity, and surveillance). However, the
gratifications of this study’s respondents deviated considerably from McQuail et al.’s (1972) underlying categories, and therefore, a suggestion for an adapted set of subcategories results from this research (see Figure 1 on p. 19). The revised subcategories proved to be convenient within the scope of this research and each category contains gratifications of multiple
respondents. However, some categories only seemed to inherit motivations for watching and did not result in obtained gratifications, and vice versa.
The most striking difference between previous research and these findings is the new categorization of surveillance. The original surveillance gratification category, as defined by McQuail et al. (1972), was not divided into underlying categories, but the results of this study indicated a divergence between merely ‘trying to be up to date’ and ‘trying to find an
explanation or more comprehensive information’. Graber’s study (1990) on learning from television news also indicated that the visuals allowed for acquiring a more complete and accurate impression of events, which verbal and written information cannot provide. Especially for this audience, it is possible that this specific surveillance motivation is amplified by their limited ability to acquire in-depth information and explanation through
text. More literate adept people would possibly tend to use written sources for information and explanation, or search selectively for visuals through digital channels.
The third research question aimed to discover whether television was used to obtain political information or whether political information was unintendedly acquired through the medium. It transpired that only one of the respondents used television with the aim to increase his political awareness and knowledge, in order to be able to make a good voting decision in elections. Thus, political information was more often unintendedly obtained by coming across it while watching television. This is in line with previous research that stated television’s ability to ‘draw people in’ who would otherwise not search for news (Aarts & Semetko, 2003; Wenner, 1983). However, whether the information is ‘absorbed’ or merely ‘noticed’ remains unclear to a large extent. Uncertainty about the absorption of the information is incited by the fact that most of the respondents indicated to have little interest in political information and to find it difficult to understand.
The final aim of this research was to discover through which other media surveillance gratifications and political information were sought or (unintendedly) obtained. Surveillance gratifications seemed to be more frequently sought through television than other media types (i.e. radio, print media, conversations, internet). Radio was indicated to be used mostly for music, internet use is to a large extent reserved for social media, and even though some respondents indicated to talk about the news, most of them said they wanted their
conversations to be mainly about entertaining topics. However, the ‘falling into’ political information argument of television (Aarts & Semetko, 2003) seems to hold true for other media as well: the respondents said that news broadcasts are heard on the radio; photos and headlines in print media appear to convey meaningful insights for the respondents; their conversations sometimes end up in political discussions; and news and political information comes up on their social media network newsfeeds occasionally. Thus, not only television
seems to be a medium that could be efficient for educating the functionally illiterate audience about political topics, even though, the results indicate that they seek to gratify surveillance needs mainly through the use of television.
Even though these previously mentioned insights on the television watching behaviour of functionally illiterate people are meaningful results of this study, some limitations and shortcomings need to be mentioned as well.
Firstly, important to keep in mind is that there could be audience orientations missing that are important to the general functionally illiterate television audience. The slightly limited sample of seven research respondents possibly failed to provide television
gratifications that a larger sample would be able to identify. However, this qualitative study does not pretend to provide insights on the functionally illiterate audience at large;
alternatively, it should be seen as insightful knowledge about individuals belonging to that specific audience.
Furthermore, an education gap between respondents and the researcher brought some implications along. Even though I attempted to avoid complex words and sentences during the interviews, it sometimes occurred that no direct answer was given to the interview
questions. Occasionally rephrasing the question helped to make it clearer for the respondents, but in other instances the question was not completely answered, or the answer was
completely irrelevant within this study’s objective. Thus, there seemed to be a language or knowledge barrier that was occasionally causing misunderstandings. In order not to misinterpret the answers, I attempted to critically determine whether they followed the
questions logically and whether the respondent understood what I was asking. This attempt at filtering the honest and relevant answers was done by comparing them to the rest of the interview by looking at the logic rhyme with other answers that were given by that same interviewee.
This misunderstanding between interviewer and interviewee might furthermore indicate that verbal information is potentially difficult to process for functionally illiterate people. This could also explain the difficulty some respondents said to experience when trying to understand television news broadcasts. Stauffer, Frost, and Rybolt (1978) also discovered an inferior information recall of television news by an illiterate audience as compared to a literate audience, which is due to different cognitive abilities. The educational process of learning to read and write enhances abilities to decode oral and visual information (Stauffer et al., 1978). News broadcasts and televised political information should, therefore, possibly inherit different characteristics for audiences with varying levels of literacy, in order to be able to transmit the information efficiently.
To conclude, the television gratifications of functionally illiterate audiences indicate that the medium plays a significant role in informing them about political topics, and consequently accounts for their inclusion in the democratic process. Most meaningful is the respondents’ intention to acquire explanation and in-depth information through the medium, because it can can possibly lead to a better informed functionally illiterate electorate if these needs are efficiently gratified.
The findings of this research contribute to the field of U&G research because they provide insights on the audience orientations of functionally illiterate audience members, and their acquisition of political information through use of media, which were previously largely ignored by the academic world. In order to further advance this research, it would be
worthwhile to consider multiple approaches. Firstly, the suggested subcategories should be considered and tested in a quantitative study, in order to determine whether this adapted set of categories is indeed an effective categorization of the television gratifications of this
audience. Further qualitative research on the suggested underlying categories could focus on the surveillance gratification of finding more in-depth information and explanation, and
comparatively study via which media literate audiences gratify those needs. These studies would advance existing U&G theories, by providing thorough insights on the media gratifications of functionally illiterate audiences.
Secondly, the educational effect of television and its ability raise political awareness among people with varying levels of literacy could be explored by means of an experiment. Ultimately, this would lead to new insights about what complicates televised political information for functionally illiterate audiences, and to suggestions on producing new television program types that allow for effective information transmission and result in meaningful information absorption. If these suggested programs prove to be informative to this audience, they would eventually lead to a better informed electorate with more
References
Aarts, K. & Semetko, H. A. (2003). The divided electorate: Media use and political involvement. The
Journal of Politics 65(3), 759-584.
ACE (2013, November 15). Legal provisions for illiterate voters. Retrieved from http://aceproject.org/electoral-advice/archive/questions/replies/520476619
Agee, J. (2005). Literacy, aliteracy, and lifelong learning. New Library World 106(1212/1213), 244-252.
Albarran, A. B., Anderson, T., Bejar, L. G., and Bussart, A. L. (2007). What happened to our
audience: Radio and new technology uses and gratifications among young adult users. Journal
of Radio Studies 14(2), 92-101.
Algemene Rekenkamer (2016). Aanpak van laaggeletterheid. Den Haag. Retrieved from
https://www.rekenkamer.nl/publicaties/rapporten/2016/04/20/aanpak-van-laaggeletterdheid Baay, P., Buisman, M., and Houtkoop, W. (2015). Laaggeletterden: Achterblijvers in de
digitale wereld? Retrieved from https://www.lezenenschrijven.nl/uploads/editor/ecbo.15-217-Laaggeletterden-achterblijvers-in-de-digitale-wereld-web.pdf
Blumler, J. G. & Coleman, S. (2015). Democracy and the media – Revisited. Javnost - The Public
22(2), 111-128.
CBS. (2017, February 15) Bijna 13 miljoen kiesgerechtigden op 15 maart. Retrieved from https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2017/07/bijna-13-miljoen-kiesgerechtigden-op-15-maart Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative criteria.
Qualitative Sociology 13(1), 3-21.
Delli Carpini, M. X. & Keeter, S. (1996). Political knowledge, political power and the democratic citizen. In What Americans know about politics and why it matters (pp. 1-21). New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
Gerson, W. M. (1966). Mass media socialization behavior: Negro-white differences. Social Forces
Graber, D. A. (1990). Seeing is remembering: How visuals contribute to learning from television news. Journal of Communication 40(3), 134-155.
Graber, D. A. (2001). Political learning: How our brains process complex information. In Processing
Politics: Leaning from television in the internet age (pp. 11-42). Chicago, Illinois: The
University of Chicago Press.
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G. and Gurevitz, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion
Quarterly 37(4). 509-523.
Kaye, B. K. & Johnson, T. J. (2002). Online and in the know: Uses and gratifications of the web for political information. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 46(1), 54-71.
McQuail, D., Blumler, J., & Brown, J. (1972). The television audience: A revised perspective. In D. McQuail (Ed.), Sociology of mass communications (pp. 135–165). Middlesex, England: Penguin.
Palmgreen, P., & Rayburn, J. D. (1979). Uses and gratifications and exposure to public television.
Communication Research 6(2), 155–180.
Reynolds, A. & Steenbergen, M. (2006). How the world votes: The political consequences of ballot design, innovation and manipulation. Electoral Studies 25(3), 570-598.
Rubin, A. M. (1985). Uses of daytime television soap operas by college students. Human
Communication Research 5(2), 109-120.
Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication and
Society 3(1), 3-37.
Schaefer, R. J., Avery R. K. (1993). Audience conceptualizations of “Late Night with David Letterman”. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 37, 253–273.
Stauffer, J., Frost R., and Rybolt, W. (1978). Literacy, illiteracy, and learning from television news.
Communication Research 5(2), 221-232.
Strömbäck, J. (2017). Does public service TV and the intensity of the political information environment matter? Journalism Studies 18(11), 1415-1432.
UNESCO (2008). International literacy statistics: A review of concepts, methodology and current data. Montreal, Quebec: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
Ünver, H. (2016) Measuring the global information society – explaining digital inequality by economic level and education standard. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and
Engineering 173, 1-20.
Veludo‐de‐Oliveira, T. M., Ikeda, A. A., and Campomar, M. C. (2006). Laddering in the practice of marketing research: barriers and solutions. Qualitative Market Research: An International
Journal 9(3), 297-306.
Viswanathan, M., Rosa, J. A., and Harris, J. E. (2005). Decision making and coping of functionally illiterate consumers and some implications for marketing management. Journal of Marketing
69, 15-31.
Wallendorf, M. (2001). Literally literacy. Journal of Consumer Research 27, 505-511.
Weiss, B. D., Reed, R. L., and Kligman, E. W. (1994). Literacy skills and communication methods of low-income-older persons. Patient Education and Counseling 25, 109-119.
Wenner, L. A. (1983). Political news on television: A reconsideration of audience orientations. The
Tables Table 2. U&G Category: Diversion
Row Type Gratifications sought Gratifications obtained
1
Relaxation No gratifications sought
“If I watch television, I’m totally in the program, and I just watch that program. Then I have the feeling that I am calm, and I feel at ease.” (Mounir)
2 “I just get power [from watching
television], yes, I really get power from that. In the past, I used to go sit in the car, and I would drive with the car and then return back home, and that calmed me down back then. You could say thát was my television back then. But that was 20 years ago… Now it’s the other way around.” (Bart)
3
Pastime/ when bored
[What moves you to watch television?] “When you have time to entertain yourself, if you have nothing better to do… So, when you’re bored.” (Michael)
No gratifications obtained
4 [Do you watch television when bored?]
“Yes… that is… true. Yes.” (Willemijn)
5 “When bored, instead of getting a book
to read, no, you just turn on the TV.” (Bart)
6 [Do you watch television when bored?]
“Yes, that I do.” (Joost)
7 “Yes, sometimes when I’m bored it’s
different. When I’m bored I just turn the TV on and I’ll watch.” (Mounir)
8
Habit
“No, I do that [turn the television on when waking up]… everyday. It’s a habit of mine.” (Willemijn)
No gratifications obtained
9 “Well, before I go to sleep. That is a
habit, yes. At about 9, half-nine, 10 o’ clock, I usually turn it on. That’s when I go to bed.” (Bart)
10 “It’s automatic, I think… yes… sort of a
radio with images. It’s pleasant when it’s turned on. Yes. I only listen and don’t look at it, yes, a radio without image… uh, no, a radio with image!” (Joost)
11 “I turn it on every time I get home, and
shut it off when I go to bed at 12.” (Hans)
12 “Mostly in the mornings. I reserve time
for it. Just because I just woke up, just some noise in my ears you know, in the background. It’s just that you turn it on… You hear some news… just to see something.” (Michael)
Row Type Gratifications sought Gratifications obtained 13
Entertainment and emotional
response
[about Wegmisbruikers] “Because I like to see how they actually use it on the road.” (Mounir)
“I don’t really need TV as cheer-up-device or something like that. I don’t need that.” (Michael)
14 “I turn it on because I am a bit tired, if I
have to get up early switch the TV on. I have to wake up, and then I like to hear the news.” (Michael)
[How does television make you feel?] “Happy. Or when watching something with a true story, I will loose myself in it… Then I’m completely emerged and the tears roll over my face.” (Willemijn)
15 “Laughing is nice, fun is always nice.
[Watching television] to keep some fun… Yes, it is true.” (Mounir)
“Yes, you learn from it, and yes, the people [on television] cheer you up. These people are helped by the program [referring to Kassa]. I think that’s beautiful to see.” (Joost)
16 [Do you watch television to feel better?]
“No. Not at all.” (Michael)
“Yes, I do… It’s very important, humour. You get more happiness.” (Bart)
17 “Yes, for a bit of humour.” (Mounir) “Yes, absolutely. I only watch programs
that I like to see. So that cheers you up.” (Joost)
18 [Do you like to be moved by television?]
“Yes, but I need to be in the mood for that.” (Joost)
19
Arousal
“Yes, you just attract it. If there is something exciting on TV, you want to see all of it and stay watching. Even when there’s advertisements, you just channel surf for a bit, and you see something else… You just want to know how it ends. Yes.” (Bart)
“When I watch that [Opsporing Verzocht], at what happens with thefts and all that, that’s always nice to see. Then you can also solve the case, and search for things. Like, find the culprits, and the officers can find the culprits and then you can find a solution. It is exciting, and also… Yes, exciting it is very easy, yes.” (Mounir)
20 [What do you like about sports on
television?]
“The competition. Sometimes it’s very hectic, because I have to watch how they skate, ánd I need to take notes during that of the lap times. Because some people say that the 10 kilometre run is boring. Well, that is not true!” (Femke)
“Well, with ice skating and football I’m always like: ‘oof!’. With skating and football, yes… Four years ago, after the Olympic Games I was still hyper afterwards.” (Femke)
21 It [watching sports] can make me very
hyper. When it’s thrilling I can get very hyper. After a few 500 meters… or when there has been a faulty start: [exclaims] Shite!” (Femke)
22
Escape
“No, I never had that, I never chose TV to… solve other things you know… Yes, I won’t use TV with… You know… Not that I watch with the idea… to watch some shitshow to see people: ‘he has a problem, let me see your show’, you know?” (Michael)
[Do you watch television to escape?] “That’s a difficult question… I think that’s really difficult.”
[And during watching, does it happen that you forget everything around you?] “Yes, that happens automatically.” (Willemijn)
23 “No, if skating is on TV, I forget the
whole world around me. That is really pleasant. I look around me and think: ‘oh, it’s already dark outside. Oh, it’s already evening.” (Femke)
