Entertainment Industries: Entertainment as a Cultural System PDF Free Download
1 / 29/29
100%
Entertainment Industries
Entertainment Industries is the first book to map entertainment as a cultural system.
Including work from world-renowned analysts such as Henry Jenkins and Jonathan
Gray, this innovative collection explains what entertainment is and how it works.
Entertainment is audience-centred culture. The Entertainment Industries are a
uniquely interdisciplinary collection of evolving businesses that openly monitor evol-
ving cultural trends and work within them. The producers of entertainment –central to
that practice –are the new artists. They understand audiences and combine creative,
business and legal skills in order to produce cultural products that cater to them.
Entertainment Industries describes the characteristics of entertainment, the systems
that produce it, and the role of producers and audiences in its development, as well as
explaining the importance of this area of study, and how it might be better integrated
into Universities.
This book was originally published as a special issue of Continuum: Journal of
Media & Cultural Studies.
Alan McKee is a Professor in the Film, Television and New Media and Entertainment
Industries areas at Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Christy Collis is a cultural geographer, and Senior Lecturer in Media and Commu-
nication and in Entertainment Industries at Queensland University of Technology,
Australia.
Ben Hamley teaches in both the Creative Industries and Business Faculties at Queens-
land University of Technology, Australia.
This page intentionally left blank
Entertainment Industries
Entertainment as a Cultural System
Edited by
Alan McKee, Christy Collis and Ben Hamley
Routledge
Taylor &. Francis Group
LONDON AND NEW YORK
Routledge
First published 2012
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2012 Taylor & Francis
This book is a reproduction of Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, Volume 24, Issue 6. The
Publisher requests to those authors who may be citing this book to state, also, the bibliographical details of
the special issue on which the book was based.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any
electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and
recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the
publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used
only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN13: 978-0-415-68104-9
Typeset in Times New Roman
by Taylor & Francis Books
Disclaimer
The publisher would like to make readers aware that the chapters in this book are referred to as articles as
they had been in the special issue. The publisher accepts responsibility for any inconsistencies that may have
arisen in the course of preparing this volume for print.
Contents
Notes on contributors vii
1. Entertainment and media/cultural/communication/etc. studies
Jonathan Gray 1
Section 1: What is entertainment?
2. The aesthetic system of entertainment
Alan McKee 9
3. Crime as entertainment: The case of the TV crime drama
Sue Turnbull 21
4. Fully articulated: The rise of the action figure and the changing face
of ‘children’s’entertainment
Jason Bainbridge 31
5. Towards an understanding of Australian genre cinema and entertainment:
Beyond the limitations of ‘Ozploitation’discourse
Mark David Ryan 45
Section 2: The institutions of entertainment
6. The borders that law sets on entertainment
Des Butler 57
7. Understanding creative roles in entertainment: The music supervisor
as case study
Natalie Lewandowski 67
8. The first global entertainment company: Explaining Pathé’s dominance
in the pre-Hollywood film industry
Jon Silver 79
Section 3: Entertainment and its audiences
9. The diffused audience of football
Ingar Mehus 99
v
10. Fans teaching fans how to consume: The role of ritual in the
consumption of entertainment
Larry Neale 107
Section 4: Entertainment education
11. Entertainment industries at university: Designing a curriculum
Christy Collis, Alan McKee and Ben Hamley 123
12. Top Gear, top journalism: Three lessons for political journalists
Stephen Harrington 135
13. Transmedia Storytelling and Entertainment: An annotated syllabus
Henry Jenkins 145
Index 161
CONTENTS
vi
from the world’s most popular TV show
Notes on contributors
Jason Bainbridge is Senior Lecturer and Discipline Head of Media at Swinburne Uni-
versity of Technology, Australia. He has published across a diverse range of subjects
including representations of law in popular culture, chequebook journalism, news
cultures and Japanese popular culture and is co-author of the textbook Media and
Journalism: New Approaches to Theory and Practice (2009).
Des Butler is a Professor of Law at the Faculty of Law at Queensland University of
Technology, Australia. He is the author or co-author of 15 monographs and
numerous articles on topics including media law, contract law, and liability for psy-
chiatric injury. He currently teaches media law and contract law and will soon be
teaching entertainment law.
Christy Collis is a cultural geographer, and Senior Lecturer in Media and Commu-
nication at Queensland University of Technology, Australia. With Alan McKee she
designed and coordinates the Entertainment Industries program at QUT.
Jonathan Gray is Associate Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at University of
Wisconsin, Madison, USA. He is author of Show Sold Separately: Promos, Spoilers,
and Other Media Paratexts (2010), Television Entertainment (2008), and Watching
with The Simpsons: Television, Parody, and Intertextuality (2006).
Ben Hamley was the Project Manager for the introduction of the Entertainment
Industries program at Queensland University of Technology, Australia, and teaches
in both the Creative Industries and Business Faculties. His interests are in inter-
disciplinary education and promoting creativity and entrepreneurship in young
people. He is currently the Queensland project manager for a not-for-profit creative
agency, Smart Artz.
Stephen Harrington is a Lecturer in Media and Communication at Queensland Uni-
versity of Technology, Australia, and is particularly interested in the political and
social value of entertainment.
Henry Jenkins is the Provost’s Professor of Communications, Journalism, and Cine-
matic Arts at the University of Southern California, USA. He is the author of 13
books, including Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, and is
now completing work on Spreadable Media: Creating Value in a Networked Culture
(with Sam Ford and Joshua Green).
vii
Natalie Lewandowski is a B.Commerce (2006) and B.Arts –Hons 1st class (2007)
graduate from Macquarie University, Australia, and is currently a PhD candidate.
Natalie was awarded the Macquarie University prize for E-commerce in 2005 and
Honours –1st class for her thesis ‘Sound . . . Tracks’in 2007. Throughout the
period 2007–2010 she worked as a research assistant to Dr Rebecca Coyle and
Professor Philip Hayward on an ARC Discovery project on Australian Film Scores
based at Southern Cross and Macquarie Universities. Natalie has worked as a mar-
keting manager, sponsorship coordinator and public relations manager for numerous
arts and retail organizations. Her interdisciplinary approach stems from her passion
for both the arts and business.
Alan McKee is a Professor in the Film, Television and New Media area at Queensland
University of Technology, Australia. He has written for television (Big Brother),
radio (ABC 720), computer games (Scoot!), newspapers (Brother/Sister), magazines
(DNA) and stand-up comedy (The Josh Thomas Variety Hour). He has written, co-
written and edited six academic books including Beautiful Things in Popular Culture
(2007), The Public Sphere (2005) and Australian Television (2001). Alan is a past
president of the Cultural Studies Association of Australia; and past editor of Con-
tinuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies. With Christy Collis he leads the
Entertainment Industries development team.
Ingar Mehus is a Lecturer at the Department of Sociology and Political Science –Sport
Science, the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway. His research
interests include sport spectatorship, sport participation among young people, exer-
cise enjoyment and physical activity levels in general.
Larry Neale is a Senior Lecturer in the Business School at Queensland University of
Technology in Brisbane, Australia, and serves as academic lead for the Asia Pacific
in the Google Online Marketing Challenge. Larry is a keen sports fan and life
observer, and has parlayed his passions into research streams including consumer
ethics, sports marketing, electronic marketing, customer complaints and service
recovery.
Mark David Ryan is a Research Fellow for the Creative Industries Faculty, and works
in the Film, Television and New Media Discipline at Queensland University of
Technology, Australia. He is an expert on Australian horror movies having written
extensively on the subject, and writes on genre cinema more generally. Over the last
five years, Ryan has published numerous essays on Australian film, creative indus-
tries, and cultural policy.
Jon Silver is a Senior Lecturer in Film, Television and New Media at Queensland
University of Technology, Australia. He is a producer with four feature film credits
and he previously worked as head of marketing for Greater Union –Australia’s
largest cinema chain that also operated its own film distribution company. He also
holds two Masters Degrees in marketing management and in history. His research
focus is on film history, the movie business and film industry futures.
Sue Turnbull is a Professor in the School of Social Sciences, Media and Communica-
tion at the University of Wollongong, Australia. She is the editor of Media
International Australia and the co-editor of Participations: The Journal of Media and
Reception Theory.
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
viii
Entertainment and media/cultural/communication/etc. studies
Jonathan Gray
Department of Communication Arts, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA
This article argues that thinking of media/cultural/communication/etc. studies as
entertainment studies might help the field break through numerous impasses, (1)
moving beyond medium specificity, (2) honestly embracing the fact that we study
entertainment, (3) forcing us to contextualize contemporary entertainment within
broader histories of entertainment, (4) asking of us to examine news and ads as
entertainment, and (5) analyzing that which does not entertain alongside that which
does.
Given the wide range of institutional names applied to the studyofmedia and popular
cultureworldwide, acall to study entertainment studies may be greeted as warmly, and
may be regarded as about as pressingaconcern, as acall to create anew flavour of jelly
bean. After all, we already have film studies, television studies, media studies, new media
studies,digitalmedia studies, comparativemedia studies, communication, communi-
cations,telecommunications, communicationstudies, popular communication, communi-
cation and theatre arts, screen artsand cultures, media arts and studies, cinematic arts,
popular culture, cultural studies, creative industries, various combinations thereof (media
and communication studies, media and cultural studies, radio-TV-film, and so forth),and
undoubtedly several Ihave forgotten. Do we really need another name? No wonder the
study of media is often conducted with disappointingly incompletelit reviews by those in
correlate fields –those with wonderfully simplenames, like ‘English’ or ‘Sociology’ –
when they can’tfairlybeexpected to findusamidst this phonebook of institutional names.
And yet Iwanttotake the next few pages to argue for the term entertainment studies and
for the present and looming impasses that media/cultural/communication/etc.studies face
that this new term may encourage us to avoid.
In doing so, Iamnot arguing for aglobal namechange.Although the multiplenames
for our field and its correlates are at times overwhelming, and although the resulting
confusion may cause numerous institutional and structuralproblems, personally Iamfond
of the diversity of interests and approaches that are represented by the totality of the
names. Our various names form something of agestalt, and they makeagenre more than a
specific discipline. Yet just as any new film in agenre can subtly or even profoundly
change one’s understanding of that genre and of how it works, of what is possiblewithin
texts of that genre,and hence of whattoexpect and what to look for from texts within that
genre, so too might adding entertainmentstudies to the mix callfor and inflect acertain
1
approach to media and culturethat would help expand the genre/field in meaningful and
important ways.
So,why ‘entertainment studies’?
(1) Entertainment studies moves us away from aparalysing medium specificity
Media studies has been haunted by an apparent need to erect firm borders between media.
Historical reasons exist for this, of course. Thus, taking the case in the United States,
following its own long battle for legitimacy as adiscipline, film studies programs and
departmentsfrequently bought saidlegitimacybypromising to study‘film’, not ‘movies’.
Ratherthan move to disassemble the taste hierarchy that had placed bourgeois favourites
above those of ‘themasses’, and urged humanities education to focus solely on the former,
film studies quite often arguedinsteadthat its topic matter was resolutely high. Radio and
television in the United States, however, began as commercial media. The dirty history of
broadcasting therefore rendered it harderfor would-be defenders of broadcasting to
make the case for its artistry:neither Milton nor Godard stopped to allow for Neutrogena
commercials, whereas broadcasting did, thereby undercutting its own claims to artistryfor
some observers. This is not to say that numerous valiant attempts weren’tmade to insist
upon broadcasting’s strengths (nor that literature or film has ever been immune to charges
of commercialization). But from the early days the justification for studying radio and
television was usually based instead on the media’s massness –surely, it was noted by
many, if such media had the eyes and ears of so many, one simplymust analyse what
meanings and messagesthey conveyed, and thus whatroles their industrial creators played
in guiding popular culture. If film studies veered towards elite audiences, values, and art,
television and radio studies focused primarily on mass audiences, values, and pleasures.
And if scholars were at first scared of broadcasting’s masses, in the wakeofthe University
of Birmingham’s Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, of post-structuralist theories
of language and meaning, and of both Pierre Bourdieu’s (1984) and feminism’s arguments
regarding the politics of taste, anew wave of scholars was invitedtochallenge the old
value hierarchies and to take the appeals of popular cultureseriously. Some of these
scholarswere in film studies, but the nascent field of television studies latchedonto such
ideas with greater zeal. Adividing line betweenfilm and broadcasting developed in
numerous locations, with taste politics and differing theoretical canons playing as much a
role in separating the two as the media themselves.
Then along camedigital media, which wreakedhavoc with the distinctions. Already,
the act of drawing aline between film and broadcasting was deeplyproblematic, of course.
When televisionbroadcasted movies, whenthe combination of the VCR and the local video
store made the television akey venue for watching both ‘films’ and ‘movies’ (perhaps
especially the former,when multiplexes provedunwillingtoplay them), and when
television and cinema increasingly found themselves ownedand createdbythe same
people, film studies regularly requiredtelevision, and television studies regularly involved
film. But digital media confused the distinctions even further.Inour contemporarymedia
environment, film, radio, and television can all be consumed entirely on one’s computer,
iPod, or phone, thereby seemingly taking film,radio, and television outoffilm,radio, and
television studies. Higher quality televisions, state-of-the-art home theatre sound systems,
DVDs, and Blu-Rays have made televisionarich site for film (see Klinger 2006). And
franchising and transmediapractices of conglomerated content industries increasingly
move characters, plots, and worlds across various media. As the subtitle to Henry Jenkins’s
Convergence Culture contends, we are now seeing old and new media collide (2006).Even
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRIES
2
the clunky phrase ‘new media’ often dates its speaker, as increasing numbers of viewers
and listenersfind little ‘new’ about downloading or streaming content,and as further
developments in production, delivery, and reception cultures render supposedly new media
decidedlyold in amatter of years. Meanwhile, so muchoffilm,radio, or television culture
takes place across media, in Internet chatrooms and blogs, in live-tweeting of ashow,
with trailersand otherhype for one medium situated in another, and so forth. If Marshall
McLuhan’s (1994) crude distinctions betweenvarious media were ever applicable, they are
no longer: few media are ‘hot’or‘cold’, they’re all just warm.Wecan still discern entities
called film, movies,radio, and television, but they overlap to adegreethat none of these
entitiescan be easily separated out from one another. When they are, it is usually on the
methodological and politicalgroundsdescribed above.
Those divisions mustbechallenged more often. If we can talk about CitizenKane as
art, why can’t we talk about The Wire as art, or Private Practice for that matter? If we can
discuss concerns about popular politics on talk radio, let’s discuss the sameissue with
relation to popular film.And if we can ask about production cultures in television, let’s ask
about productioncultures in film (not just ‘movies’). While we’re at it, let’s also move
away from aradio–film–television hegemony and study awide range of other media
more definitively, whetheritbecomics, games, or print media. Of course, manyscholars
are doing precisely these things. Many are alsoconducting multimedia studies,where the
issue not the medium is important. They’reattending conferences with one another,
reading books that publishers labelled ‘film studies’when they’re studying television, and
so forth. In short, the medium-specific labels of different fields often appeartohave
outlived their usefulness.
Entertainment studies is aterm, though, that encourages multimediaand transmedia
analysis. If the task is to studythat which entertains, the term invites us to look beyond any
franchise or text’s specific iterations in aspecific medium. Lost is not just atelevision
show: it is also aseries of websites,several ARGS, books, clothing, etc. Twilight is not just
amovie and abook: it is awhole series of cultural practices and texts. Entertainment
studies as title not only de-centres the medium specificity but in doing so may also de-
centre atext centricity that often unquestioningly assumes that the film (in film studies) or
the television show (in television studies) is the core and mostrelevantpart of its media
entourage. It asks us to think transmedially, ‘paratextually’ (Gray 2010), and with an eye
on convergences and multi-modalities. Or even if we’re still interested in asingle text, it
situates that text within ‘entertainment’, and thereby invitesothers to draw comparisons,
rather than to see the electric fencebetween, for instance, film studies and television
studies,and quickly move away from fertile ground for study.
(2) Entertainment studies is honest about what we’re studying: entertainment
As my all-too-brief account of the fractious historybetweenUSfilm studies and television
studies above suggests, all study of the media and popular culturehas been surrounded –
hounded,even –byvalue hierarchies. On one level, we’re frequently required to justify
ourselvesrelative to other, longstanding departmentsthat study‘real Art’. Our ever-
increasing student numbers don’t necessarily help,either:tosome universityadministrators
and critics our popularity signifies uncritical populism. I’ve met scholarsinother
departmentswho take the small number of studentsinterested in majoring in their subject
as abadge of honour, and as asign of their subject’s intellectual mettle. I’ve alsoseen
universityadministrations who like the money that all our student interest brings, but remain
deeply suspicious about what it portends.I’d like to believe thisispeculiar to my own
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRIES
3
nationalsetting, but it’s pervasive, across the globe. After all, and on another level, we face
these suspicions not just from campus colleagues (who, to be fair, mustoften defend their
own disciplines) but also from societyasawhole. Surely, if you’rereading this and you
study media, you’ve heardcountless peopleexpress amazement when youtell them what
you do. Some are incredulous, clearlydisturbed by the notion that we studyentertainment.
For others, jealousyabounds,asthey envision us sitting around all day watching television
and playing videogames beforewriting afew errant thoughts at day’s end while they labour
in their own respective jobs or careers.
Acommon reaction and retort to such suspicions is to hide behind the multi-syllabic
words in our titles: ‘no, no, Idon’t studyProgram X’, onemight find myself saying,
‘I study the phenomenology and ontology of contemporarytransmediated franchises’.
We are studying thosemulti-syllabic words, but at core we’re almost all studying
entertainment, and perhaps entertainment studies as label may force us to admit to the fact,
and thus to come to terms with what entertainmentis. If those who hear that we study
entertainment are either repulsedorexcited, clearly entertainment matters agreat deal,and
at some leveleveryone knowsit. ‘Television studies’ can often focus us on why television
matters and how it works, ‘communication studies’ can focus us on why communication
matters and how it works, and along the way we’ve talked about entertainment, butIlike
how entertainment studies focuses us on why entertainment matters and howitworks.
It calls on us to develop theories about entertainment, and to better explore the inner
workings of aconcept that unites almost all media use (and muchcommunication). Instead
of beingembarrassedbythe fact that we’re studying entertainment, therefore, let’s be
plainly honest about it and embraceit.
(3) Entertainment studies calls on us to be historical
An odd thing happened when English and media/communication/cultural/etc. studies
experienced their regrettable divorce: English seemingly gained custody rights over
everything ‘old’. Admittedly, some subfields have found ways to maintain contact with the
old, so that thosestudying cultural studies from arhetoricalstandpoint, for instance, still get
to see the Classics on weekends. But otherwise, our field is often besottedwith the new.
Admittedly, our current labels tend to require this: when afield is named after amedium
that did not exist acentury ago it is hard to justify the exploration of hundred-year-old
material. If, however,our charge is to study ‘entertainment’, only the foolishamong us
would suggestthat entertainment began with film, radio, or television. Thus, the title
requiresustosituate our studies within abroader historicalcontext.Thiswork is performed
occasionally at the current moment:comedy scholars, for instance, often draw inspiration
from Mikhail Bakhtin’stheories of medieval carnival, those studying serial narrativesoften
feel compelled to examinethe novel, and so forth. But too often, ‘history’ for media studies
means the 1930s.
Thetaste divide that Ihave arguedhounds media studies is only exacerbated by our
field’s unwillingnesstogoback further in time. If we can fathom audience research
projects of Grey’s Anatomy,why can’twefathom similar projects of Hamlet over time?
Afew unhappy English and art historyprofessors may prefer us to keep our grubby mitts
off their subject matter, but there is so muchtobelearned by connecting our current
moment to the centuries that camebefore it, and by engaging with and learning from those
unhappy professors’ moreintellectually generous colleagues. Otherwise, we are left with
the unsatisfying goldenage myths that abound, as with Neil Postman’s postulation of a
rational, contemplative literary mind that supposedly preceded our collective amusing
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRIES
4
ourselvestodeath (1986), or as with Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno’sover-easy
distinction betweenindustrially produced cultureand that which camebefore it (2002).
Or with an old school, pre-Theory notion of austere Literaturethat welcomes textual
analysis, and new-fangled pop kitsch without depth. To talk of entertainment studies
is to invite and encourage acolonization of earlier moments of entertainment history
and an intellectual collaboration with our colleagues in English, both of which will allow
us to interrogatethese many golden age myths, and to situate the now in the then with
greater skill.
(4) Entertainment studies invites us to approach news and advertising as
entertainment
At first blush, entertainment studies may seem to suffer from the significant problem of
bracketing entertainmentoff from the rest of popular culture, so that, for instance,
television studies would ‘lose’ newsand advertising, while film studies wouldlose
documentary. Rather than lose news, documentary, and othereducational/informational
genres, though, and rather than take the eye off the omnipresenceofpromotion in much
media and popular culture, entertainment studies might encourage us to examinethese
genres as always already entertainment.
Discussion of ‘infotainment’ toofrequentlyworks with theodd,erroneous notion of
news as agenre that wasoncepurelyinformational,and wasproducedsolelyfor the
edification andenlightenment of consumer-citizens, untilthe maraudingforce that is
entertainmentscarred it forever. However, if we were to approach news andinformational
genres with theunderstanding that they pre-eminentlymeantoentertain, andalwayshave,
Ibelieve that ourfield’sappreciationofhow thenewsworks wouldbesignificantlymore
sophisticatedthanitcan at timesbe. In writingthis,Idonot mean to wave thewhite flagof
dumbingdownand endorseanews hour that is allflashing graphics,reports of carchases,
mindless banter betweennewscasters,and screamingand yellingbyapundit or four.Let
us continue to criticizesuchmedia vociferously,and to examinethe structural determinants
that make it so common.But at thesame time,the entertainmentfunctionofnewsneeds to
be takenseriously,not simply scoffedatand derided. Asmall band of criticsinmedia and
cultural studieshaveprovidedsomeofthe more interestingand critically engaging accounts
of thenewsbyfocusingonhow it entertains,and what role this entertainmentplays in
enabling,not simply disabling, itsroleinademocratic polity (see Baym 2005,2007;
Corner andPels2003; Hartley1996; Jones2005, 2009;Van Zoonen 2004). Whiletheir work
hasattimes been slow to work itsway into politicalcommunication classesand texts, and
whileIhavelittlefaith that it wouldprove more successful in doingsounder abanner
of entertainmentstudies,thiswork’s abilitytojuggleadequately complexand nuanced
concepts of amusement, fandom,and thepopular whilesimultaneously discussing thepublic
sphere,citizenship,and public discoursehas regularlyallowed it an understandingofthe
news that traditionalpolitical communicationstruggles to achieve.
Similarly, work on advertising is doomed to crudeness if it cannot conceive of
advertising as entertainment. Ads, of course, can be thoroughlyannoying, especially when
we are engagedinagood program, they can be atacky violation of manyapublic space,
and they are the source of many of the messagesthat critically engagedscholarsmust
attack day in and day out. But they do not succeed simply because various industries cede
time and space to them, or muchless because consumer-citizens are weak beings that need
guidance in how to live. Many succeed because they are entertaining. Many, too, may not
‘succeed’interms of encouraging or completing asale, but they may nevertheless gain
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRIES
5
something of afollowing. Abrowse through YouTube suggests the pull of advertising as
entertainment, as the site is full of uploaded ads, manyofwhich boast large viewer
numbers. Thus, rather than let advertising out of its grasp, entertainment studies as term
invites us to consider ads as entertainment, and as one of the most prevalent forms of
entertainment aroundfor that matter.
(5) Entertainment studies challengesustostudy that which does notentertain
If ‘entertainment’ is front and centre in afield, that field requires its scholars and students
to ask whethersomething is indeed entertaining. We are also requiredtoexplain why
certain products can entertainone individual or group yet thoroughly displease another
individual or group. Thus, entertainment studies calls on us to ask why and how
entertainment succeeds, and to work out the various ways in which ‘success’ or ‘failure’
can be measured or assessed.
As such,and perhapscounter-intuitively,one of thekey reasonswhy entertainment
studiesintrigues me is becauseitchallengesustomakesense of that whichisnotentertaining
alongsidethatwhich is.Asnoted above, politicalcommunication andadvertising studies
have at timesneglected to take entertainmentseriously,instead positing it as aproblem to be
overcome,adanger to be avoided. Butonthe otherend of thespectrum, film, media, and
cultural studieshaveattimes suffered from beinginordinatelyobsessedwiththatwhich is
entertaining.Filmstudies’formalist mode oftentakes films that arejudgedtobeenlightening
as thebarrier forentry,while itsmorepsychoanalytic, theoreticalmodehas oftenbeen
centredontheoriesofdesireand thecinematic.Media andculturalstudies,meanwhile,took
theactiveaudienceand fanstudies to heartatanearly ageintheir development, andthus
successful entertainment(even in spiteofapparent obstacles) hasregularly formed itssubject
matter.But entertainmentdoesn’t always work,not allfilmsentertain,and sometimesdesire
is theleast accurate term foranaudience’sresponse. Avibrant studyofmedia andpopular
culture, therefore, will need to take distaste,displeasure,disgust,despise,and dislike
seriously. When consumer-citizensare notentertained, theirreactionshouldbejustas
importantatopic fordiscussionaswhentheyare.Fan studiesare vitaltomedia andcultural
studies, butsoshouldbeanti-fanstudies andnon-fan studies(seeGray2003).And to invoke
entertainmentinafield’s titleistobegin with thequestionofwhether somethingisinfact
entertaining,and to requirethose within thefield to studythe failuretoentertain as much as
theabilitytoentertain.
If the last 20 years or so of media and cultural studies have been dominated by studies
of pleasure and enjoyment, it is through the perhaps dark passage of studying hate, dislike,
anger, disaffection, and so forth that our field may broaden its scope and relevance yet
more. As much as almost everyone has media and popular culturepleasures, we all have
many displeasures too. When 30 million Americans tune in to watch American Idol,we
need to explain why, but we are also left with the questionofwhy 280 million Americans
did not, and why some of those280 million actively disliked the show. Avatarmay have
brokenall domestic and globalbox office records, forcing us to ask how and why it
‘succeeded’, but when it alsobecame shorthand for the ills of Hollywood, and when
screeds against the film and its director became as common as praise for the film, we must
also see it as a‘failure’ and study it accordingly. Cultural studies’ intervention into elite
taste cultures that sought to excuse and dismiss vast swathesofthe world’s entertainment
as irrelevantand degradingrightly launched athousand scholarly ships in asking scholars
to study why that entertainment resonated with many consumer-citizens. But if someliked
Dallas ,The Cosby Show,Miami Vice,Madonna, Star Trek,and so forth, and if others
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRIES
6
engagedincareful negotiations with those and othertexts, manywere not amused. How
and why entertainmenthappenswill be akey topic for entertainment studies;sotoo should
how and why entertainmentdoes not happen.
Conclusion
As noted at the outset of this piece, Idonot see entertainmentstudies as abanner under
which the entire field and its correlate parts shouldmarch. Indeed, it is in part my desire
not to see the field march under any single banner,much less to become a‘discipline’ (a
word about which any self-respecting reader of Foucaultshould surely worry), that leads
me to welcome avariety of terms. Let us work with and under avariety of different labels.
Yet one such label that couldprofitablybeadded to others is entertainment studies.The
practice and the areas of focus that it calls for help address someofthe field’s continuing
problems, obstacles, and blindspots, and thus its presence would be welcome within the
odd family that is media/cultural/communication/etc. studies.
References
Baym, Geoffrey. 2005. The Daily Show:Discursive integration and the reinvention of political
journalism. Political Communication 22, no. 3: 259–76.
———. 2007. Representation and the politics of play: Stephen Colbert’s Better Know aDistrict.
Political Communication 24, no. 4: 359–76.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: Asocial critique of the judgment of taste.Trans. Richard Nice,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Corner, John, and Dick Pels, eds. 2003. Media and the restyling of politics.Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Gray, Jonathan. 2003. New audiences, new textualities: Anti-fans and non-fans. International
Journal of Cultural Studies 6, no. 1: 64–81.
———. 2010. Show sold separately: Promos, spoilers, and other media paratexts.New York:
New York University Press.
Hartley, John. 1996. Popular reality: Journalism, modernity, popular culture.London: Arnold.
Horkeimer, Max, and Theodor W. Adorno. 2002. In Dialectic of enlightenment: Philosophical
fragments,ed. Gunzelin Schmid Jephcott. Trans. Edmund Jephcott. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Jenkins, Henry. 2006. Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide.New York: New York
University Press.
Jones, Jeffrey. 2004. Entertaining politics: New political television and civic culture.Lanham, MD:
Rowman &Littlefield.
———. 2009. Entertaining politics: Satiric television and political engagement.Lanham, MD:
Rowman &Littlefield.
Klinger, Barbara. 2006. Beyond the multiplex: Cinema, new technologies, and the home.Berkeley:
University of California Press.
McLuhan, Marshall. 1994. Understanding media: The extensions of man.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Postman, Neil. 1986. Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business.
New York: Penguin.
Van Zoonen, Liesbet. 2004. Entertaining the citizen: When politics and popular culture converge.
Lanham, MD: Rowman &Littlefield.
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRIES
7
Entertainment and media/cultural/communication/etc. studies
Baym, Geoffrey . 2005. The Daily Show: Discursive integration and the reinvention of political journalism.
Political Communication 22, no. 3: 259–276.
Baym, Geoffrey . 2007. Representation and the politics of play: Stephen Colbert’s Better Know a District.
Political Communication 24, no. 4: 359–376.
Bourdieu, Pierre . 1984. Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Trans. Richard Nice ,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Corner, John , and Dick Pels , eds. 2003. Media and the restyling of politics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gray, Jonathan . 2003. New audiences, new textualities: Anti-fans and non-fans. International Journal of
Cultural Studies 6, no. 1: 64–81.
Gray, Jonathan . 2010. Show sold separately: Promos, spoilers, and other media paratexts. New York: New
York University Press.
Hartley, John . 1996. Popular reality: Journalism, modernity, popular culture. London: Arnold.
Horkeimer, Max , and Theodor W. Adorno . 2002. In Dialectic of enlightenment: Philosophical fragments, ed.
Gunzelin Schmid Jephcott . Trans. Edmund Jephcott . Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Jenkins, Henry . 2006. Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York
University Press.
Jones, Jeffrey . 2004. Entertaining politics: New political television and civic culture. Lanham, MD: Rowman
& Littlefield.
Jones, Jeffrey . 2009. Entertaining politics: Satiric television and political engagement. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Klinger, Barbara . 2006. Beyond the multiplex: Cinema, new technologies, and the home. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
McLuhan, Marshall . 1994. Understanding media: The extensions of man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Postman, Neil . 1986. Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. New York:
Penguin.
Van Zoonen, Liesbet . 2004. Entertaining the citizen: When politics and popular culture converge. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
The aesthetic system of entertainment
Bailey, P. 1998. Popular Culture and Performance in the Victorian City. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Boyes, C. 2010. What are the secrets of great sound design? SFX (200):138.
Cadzow, J. 2010. Golden girl. Sydney Morning Herald Good Weekend. 30 October 2010.
Chaplin, C. 1966. My Autobiography. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.
Debord, G. 1977. Society of the Spectacle. Detroit, Michigan: Black and Red.
Dyer, R. 1973. Light Entertainment. Ed. C. Williams , BFI Television Monographs. London: BFI.
Dyer, R. 2002. Only Entertainment. London and New York: Routledge.
Gray, J. 2008. Television Entertainment. New York: Routledge.
Hoggart, R. 1998 [1957]. The Uses of Literacy. New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.
Horkheimer, M. and T. W. Adorno . 1972. Dialectic of Enlightenment. New York: Continuum.
Jameson, F. 1991. Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham: Duke University
Press.
Leavis, Q. D. 1968 [1932]. Fiction and the Reading Public. London: Chatto & Windus.
Levine, L. 1988. Highbrow/Lowbrow: The Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy in America. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
McDowell, A. 2010. What’s the secret of creating a believable vision of the future? SFX (200):139.
McKee, A. 2008. Looking for fun in Cultural Science. Cultural Science 1 (2). http://cultural-
science.org/journal/index.php/culturalscience/article/view/12/65.
McKinstry, P. 2010. What’s the secret of great SF design? SFX (200):118.
Nasaw, D. 1993. Going Out: The Rise and Fall of Public Amusements. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Ohmann, R. 1996. Selling Culture: Magazines, Markets and Class at the Turn of the Century. London and
New York: Verso.
Olding, R. 2010. Metal masters repay their debt to the faithful. Sydney Morning Herald. 20 September 2010.
Orwell, G. 1984 [1940]. Boys’ weeklies. In The Decline of the English Murder, 31–68. London: Penguin.
Peiss, K. 1986. Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Seldes, G. 1962 [1957]. The Seven Lively Arts. New York: A S Barnes & Co.
Sheehan, P. 2002. Modernism, Narrative and Humanism. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Storey, J. 2003. Inventing Popular Culture: From Folklore to Globalization. Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell.
Waties, B. , T. Bennett and G. Martin . 1982. Popular Culture: Past and Present: A Reader. London: Croom
Helm/Open University Press.
Williams, R. 1961. The Long Revolution. Ontario: Broadview Press.
Crime as entertainment
Allen, Mike , ed. 2007. Reading CSI: Crime television under the microscope. London: I.B. Tauris.
Bolton, Zoe . 2005. Entertainment as dystopia: Film noir, melodrama and Mildred Pierce. Crimeculture,
Spring. http://www.crimeculture.com/Contents/Callforpapers.html.
Caldwell, J.T. 1995. Televisuality: Style crisis and authority in American television. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.
Cawelti, John . 1976. Adventure, mystery, romance: Formula stories as art and popular culture. Chicago and
London: University of Chicago Press.
Dyer, Richard . 1973. Light entertainment. London: British Film Institute.
Dyer, Richard . 1992. Only entertainment. London: Routledge.
Gray, Jonathan . 2008. Television entertainment. New York: Routledge.
Horton, Donald , and R. Richard Wohl . 1956. Mass communication and para-social interaction:
Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry 19: 215–229.
Lury, Karen . 2005. Interpreting television. London: Hodder Headline.
Marc, David . 1984. Demographic vistas: Television in American culture. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Reijnders, Stijn . 2010. Places of the imagination: An ethnography of the TV detective tour. Cultural
Geographies 17, no. 1: 37–52.
Sydney-Smith, Susan . 2002. Beyond Dixon of Dock Green: Early British police series. London: I.B. Tauris.
Todorov, Tzvetan . 1977. The poetics of prose. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Turnbull, Sue . 2007. The hook and the look:
CSI
and the aesthetics of the television crime series. In Allen
2007, 15–32.
Fully articulated
Barnes, Brooks . 2009. Pixar’s art leaves profit watchers edgy. New York Times, 5 April.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/business/media/06pixar.html.
Bellomo, Mark . 2009. The ultimate guide to G.I. Joe: 1982–1994. 2nd ed. Iola: Krause.
Berk, Sally Ann , Tom Tumbusch , and the editors of
Tomart’s Action Figure Digest
. 2000. Tomart’s
encyclopedia of action figures: The 1001 most popular collectibles of all time. New York: Black Dog and
Leventhal.
Clark, Eric . 2007. The real toy story: Inside the ruthless battle for Britain’s youngest consumers London:
Random House.
D’Amato, Jennie . 2009. Barbie all dolled up: Celebrating 50 years of Barbie. Philadelphia: Running Press.
Doherty, Thomas . 1988. Teenagers and teenpics: The juvenilization of American movies in the 1950s.
Boston: Unwin Hyman.
Englehart, Tom . 1987. The strawberry shortcake strategy. In Watching television, ed. Todd Gitlin , 74–108.
New York: Pantheon.
Giroux, Henry . 1996. Fugitive cultures: Race, violence and youth. New York: Routledge.
Gussin Paley, Vivian . 1984. Boys and girls: Superheroes in the doll corner. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Irving, Christopher . 2006. The swivel-arm battle-grip revolution: How G.I. Joe recruited a new generation of
comic-book readers. Back Issue: The Ultimate Comics Experience 16 (June): 15–31.
Jaffe, Deborah . 2006. The history of toys: From spinning tops to robots. Stroud: Sutton.
Jamieson, Alastair . 2009. Pixar’s ‘oldie’ flick set to be a hit. The Age, 20 April.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2009/04/19/1240079535304.html.
Jenkins, Henry , ed. 1998a. The children’s culture reader. New York and London: New York University
Press.
Jenkins, Henry , ed. 1998b. Introduction: Childhood innocence and other modern myths. In Jenkins 1998a,
1–37.
Jenkins, Henry , ed. 2003. Transmedia storytelling. MIT Technology Review, 15 January.
Jenkins, Henry , ed. 2006. Convergence culture. New York: New York University Press.
Kline, Stephen . 1989. Limits to imagination: Marketing and children’s culture. In Cultural politics in
contemporary America, ed. Ian Angus and Sut Jhally , 299–316. New York: Routledge.
Jenkins, Henry , ed. 1993. Out of the garden: Toys and children’s culture in the age of TV marketing.
London: Verso.
Konner, Melvin . 1991. Childhood. Boston: Little Brown.
Lord, M.G. 2004. Forever Barbie: The unauthorized biography of a real doll. New York: Walker.
May, James , with Ian Harrison . 2009. James May’s toy stories. Scoresby, VIC: Five Mile Press.
Michlig, John . 1998. G.I. Joe: The complete story of America’s favourite man of action. San Francisco:
Chronicle Books.
Miller, G. Wayne . 1998. Toy wars: The epic struggle between G.I. Joe, Barbie and the companies that make
them. New York: Times Books.
Norlund, Christopher . 2006. Imagining terrorists before September 11: Marvel’s GI Joe comic books,
1982–1995. ImageTexT: Interdisciplinary Comics Studies 3, no. 1.
http://www.english.ufl.edu/imagetext/archives/v3_1/norlund/index.shtml.
Pecora, Norma Odom . 1998. The business of children’s entertainment. New York: Guilford Press.
Rand, Erica . 1995. Barbie’s queer accessories. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Robinson, Matthew , and Jensen Karp . 2007. Just can’t get enough: Toys, games and other stuff from the
80’s that rocked. New York: Abrams Image.
Rotundo, E. Anthony . 1993. American manhood: Transformations in masculinity from the Revolution to the
modern era. New York: Basic Books.
Santelmo, Vincent . 2001. The complete encyclopedia to G.I. Joe. 3rd ed. New York: Krause.
Schechner, Richard . 1985. Between theater and anthropology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.
Snyder, Paul . 2009. Pixar throws down, with
Up. The Huffington Post
, 2 June.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-snyder/pixar-throws-down-with-iu_b_210103.html.
Spigel, Lynn . 1998. Seducing the innocent: Childhood and television in postwar America. In Jenkins 1998a,
110–135.
STRANGEco , ed. 2005. Toys: New designs from the art toy revolution. New York: Universe.
Strickland, Charles E. , and Andrew M. Ambrose . 1985. The changing worlds of children, 1945–1963. In
American childhood: A research guide and historical handbook, ed. Joseph M. Hawes and N. Ray Hiner ,
538–544. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Sutton-Smith, Brian . 1986. Toys as culture. New York: Gardner Press.
Sweet, Roger , and David Wecker . 2005. Mastering the universe: He-Man and the rise and fall of a billion-
dollar idea. Cincinnati: Emmis Books.
Walsh, Tim . 2005. Timeless toys: Classic toys and the playmakers who created them. Kansas City, MO:
Andrews McMeel.
Wolfenstein, Martha . 1998. Fun morality: An analysis of recent child-training literature. In Jenkins 1998a,
199–208.
Zago, Vera . 2001. Action figures: Props of performance. In Performing the force: Essays on immersion into
science fiction, fantasy and horror environments, ed. Kurt Lancaster and Tom Mikotowicz , 143–147.
Jefferson, NC and London: McFarland.
Towards an understanding of Australian genre cinema and entertainment
Altman, Rick . 1999. Film/genre. London: British Film Institute.
Brophy, Philip . 1987a. That’s exploitation: Snobs. FilmViews 132 (Winter): 29–30.
Brophy, Philip . 1987b. That’s exploitation: Turkeys. FilmViews 133 (Spring): 41–42.
Dermody, Susan , and Elizabeth Jacka . 1987. The screening of Australia: Anatomy of a film industry. Vol. 1.
Sydney: Currency Press.
Dermody, Susan , and Elizabeth Jacka . 1988. The screening of Australia: Anatomy of a national cinema.
Vol. 2. Sydney: Currency Press.
Galvin, Peter . 2008. Ozploitation rides again in new doco. Encore 28, no. 1: 8–9, 28.
George, Sandy . 1998. Producers question genre debate. Encore 16, no. 8: 12.
Hartley, Mark . 2008. Tom Ryan in conversation with Mark Hartley. The Monthly Online: Australian Politics,
Society and Culture. Transcript. http://www.themonthly.com.au/tm/node/1164
Heffernan, Kevin . 2004. Ghouls, gimmicks, and gold: Horror films and the American movie business,
1953–1968. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Heller-Nicholas, Alexandra . 2008. Ozploitation revisited: Not quite Hollywood. Metro Magazine 158
(September): 14–17.
Heller-Nicholas, Alexandra . 2009. Dark forces: Excess and absence in ‘Harlequin’ and beyond. Metro
Magazine 162 (September): 98–102.
Langford, Barry . 2005. Film genre: Hollywood and beyond. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Laseur, Carol . 1992. Australian exploitation film: The politics of bad taste. Continuum: The Australian
Journal of Media & Culture 5, no. 2. http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/5.2/Laseur.html
Lobato, Ramon , and Mark David Ryan . Forthcoming 2011. Rethinking genre studies through distribution
analysis: Issues in international horror movie circuits. New Review of Film & Television Studies 9, no. 2.
Lumby, Catharine . 2008. Alvin Purple. Sydney: Currency Press & ScreenSound Australia.
Maher, Sean . 1999. The internationalisation of Australian film and television through the 1990s.
Woolloomooloo: Australian Film Commission.
Martin, Adrian . 1988. Nurturing the Next Wave: What is cinema? In Back of beyond: Discovering Australian
film and television, 90–101. Sydney: Australian Film Commission.
Martin, Adrian . 2003. The Mad Max Movies. Sydney: Currency Press & ScreenSound Australia.
Martin, Adrian . Forthcoming 2010. Ozploitation compared to what? A challenge to contemporary Australian
film studies. Studies in Australasian Cinema. Accepted 27 September 2009.
Mayer, Geoff . 1999. Genre, post-World War II. In The Oxford companion to Australian film, ed. Brian
McFarlane , Geoff Mayer and Ina Bertrand , 177–180. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Moran, Albert , and Errol Vieth . 2006. Film in Australia: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Murray, Scott . 1994. Australian cinema in the 1970s and 1980s. In Australian Cinema, 71–146. Sydney:
Allen & Unwin.
Neale, Steve . 1981. Genre and cinema. In Popular television and film, 6–25. London: BFI Publishing.
Not Quite Hollywood: The Wild, Untold Story of Ozploitation! (documentary). Directed by Mark Hartley . City
Films Worldwide [production company]. Collingwood, VIC: Madman Entertainment [Australian theatrical
distributor], 2008.
O’Regan, Tom . 1995. Beyond ‘Australian’ film? Australian cinema in the 1990s. Perth: Centre for Research
in Culture & Communication, Murdoch University.
http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/film/1990s.html
O’Regan, Tom . 1996. Australian national cinema. London: Routledge.
O’Regan, Tom , and Susan Ward . 2006. Experimenting with the local and the transnational: Television
drama production on the Gold Coast. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 20, no. 1: 17–31.
Rayner, Jonathan . 2000. Contemporary Australian cinema: An introduction. Manchester: Manchester
University Press.
Routt, William D. 1999. Genre, pre-World War II. In The Oxford companion to Australian film, 180–182.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rowley, Stephen . 1998. Australian cinema and national identity. Mira Net.
http://home.mira.net/~satadaca/australi.htm
Ryan, Mark David . 2008. A dark new world: Anatomy of Australian horror films. PhD diss., Queensland
University of Technology.
Ryan, Mark David . 2009. Whither culture? Australian horror films and the limitations of cultural policy. Media
International Australia: Incorporating Culture and Policy 133: 43–55.
Ryan, Mark David . 2010. Australian horror movies. In Intellect directory of Australian and New Zealand
cinema, ed. Ben Goldsmith and Geoff Lealand , 188–207. Bristol: Intellect.
Ryan, Mark David . In press 2010. Australian cinema’s dark sun: The boom in Australian horror film
production. Studies in Australasian Cinema 4, no. 1.
Sargeant, Jack . 2009. Bloodshed down under:
Mad Dog Morgan
and
The Proposition
. Metro Magazine 161
(June): 100–103.
Sconce, Jeffrey . 1995. Trashing’ the academy: Taste, excess, and an emerging politics of cinematic style.
Screen 36, no. 4: 371–393.
Shore, Harvey . 2007. Making a killing out of horror. Encore 26, no. 9: 46.
Thomas Deborah, J. 2009. Tarantino’s two thumbs up: Ozploitation and the reframing of the Aussie genre
film. Metro 161 (June): 90–95.
The borders that law sets on entertainment
Bray, J.J. 1972. The juristic basis of the law relating to offences against public morality and decency.
Australian Law Journal 46: 100–108.
Butler, Des , and Sharon Rodrick . 2007. Australian media law. 3rd ed. North Ryde, Sydney: Thomson
Lawbook.
Charlesworth, Hillary . 1986. Individual rights and the Australian High Court. Law in Context 4: 52–69.
Chesterman, Michael . 2000. Freedom of speech in Australian law: A delicate plant. Aldershot and
Burlington, VT: Ashgate/Dartmouth.
Fox, Richard 1969. Obscenity and indecency. Adelaide Law Review 3: 392–402.
Fox, Richard . 1980. Depravity, corruption and community standards. Adelaide Law Review 7: 66–78.
Kocourek, Albert . 1928. Jural relations. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
Overbeck, Wayne . 2008. Major principles of media law. Boston: Thomson Wadsworth.
Pollak, Michael . 1990. Sense & censorship: Commentaries on censorship violence in Australia. Belgowlah,
NSW: Reed Books.
Willmott, Lindy , Sharon Christensen , Des Butler , and Bill Dixon . 2009. Contract law. 3rd ed. Sydney:
Oxford University Press.
Understanding creative roles in entertainment
Boardman, S. 2002. Unpublished interview – Christine Woodruff. Lismore, Australia, January.
Coyle, Rebecca . 1998. Screen scores: Studies in contemporary Australian film music. North Ryde:
Australian Film, Television & Radio School.
Coyle, Rebecca . 2005 Reel tracks: Australian feature film music and cultural identitie. Eastleigh: John
Libbey.
Lewandowski, Natalie . 2007a. Interview – Belinda Yates. Sydney, 29 May.
Lewandowski, Natalie . 2007b. Interview – Julie Hodges. Telephone. Melbourne, 31 July.
Lewandowski, Natalie . 2007c. Interview – Kim Green. Sydney, 3 August.
Lewandowski, Natalie . 2007d. Interview – Norman Parkhill. Sydney, 2 May.
Lewandowski, Natalie . 2007e. Interview – Sam Petty. Sydney, 8 June.
Lewandowski, Natalie . 2007f. Interview – Tait Brady. Telephone. Melbourne, 28 August.
Lewandowski, Natalie . 2009. Interview – Norman Parkhill. Sydney, 9 September.
Pasquariello, N. 1996. Sounds of movies: Interviews with the creators of Feature Sound Tracks. San
Francisco, California: Port Bridge Books.
Romney, J. , and A. Wootton . 1995. Celluloid jukebox: Popular music and the movies since the 50s.
London: British Film Institute.
Screen Australia . 2010. Get the picture – Cinema – Box Office by admissions and gross box office.
http://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/gtp/wcboadmission.html.
Smith, Jeff . 1998. The sounds of commerce: Marketing popular film music. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Smith, Jeff . 2001. Taking music supervisors seriously. In Experiencing the soundtrack: Part Two:
Transformations of songs into soundtracks, ed. P. Brophy , 125–146. North Ryde: Australian Film, Television
& Radio School.
The first global entertainment company
Aaker, D.A. , and M.K. Mills . 2005. Strategic marketing management. Asia-Pacific ed. Milton, QLD: John
Wiley.
Abel, R. 1994. The cine goes to town. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Abel, R. 1999. The red rooster scare: Making cinema American 1900–1910. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Bakker, G. 2003. The decline and fall of the European film industry: Sunk costs, market size, and market
structure, 1890–1927. Economic History Review 58, no. 2: 28.
http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/economicHistory/pdf/wp7003.pdf.
Balio, T. , ed. 1985. The American film industry. Madison, Wisconsin and London: University of Wisconsin
Press.
Borden, N.H. 1940. The concept of the marketing mix. Journal of Advertising 4, no. June: 2–7.
Bousquet, H. 2004. Ferdinand Zecca Who’s who in Victorian cinema. http://www.victorian-
cinema.net/zecca.htm.
Cawkell, T. and J.M. Smith , eds. 1972. The world encyclopaedia of film. London: November Books.
Cravens, D. 2000. Strategic marketing. International ed. (6th ed.) Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Csida, J. , and J.B. Csida . 1978. American entertainment. New York: Billboard Books.
Day, G.S. 1994. The capabilities of market-driven organisations. Journal of Marketing 58, no. 4: 37–52.
Deshpande, R. , J.U. Farley , and F. Webster Jr . 1993. Corporate culture, customer orientation, and
innovativeness in Japanese films: A quadrad analysis. Journal of Marketing 57, no. 1: 23–37.
Dyer, F.L. , and T.C. Martin . 1910. Edison: His life and inventions. New York and London: Harper.
Garcon, F. 1994. Gaumont: A century of French cinema. New York. Harry N. Abrams.
Hay, D. and J. Vickers , eds. 1987. The economics of market dominance. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Hayward, S. 2000. France. In The international movie industry, ed. Gorham Kindem , 195–196. Carbondale:
Southern Illinois University Press.
Jaworski, B.J. , and A.K. Kohli . 1993. Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of
Marketing 57, no. 7: 53–70.
Jones, C. 2001. Co-evolution of entrepreneurial careers, institutional rules and competitive dynamics in
American film, 1895–1920. Organization Studies 22, no. 6: 911–944.
Kindem, G. , ed. 2000. The international movie industry. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
MIP . 2007. Pierre-Victor Continsouza: The Continsouza establishments. Industrial Precision Mechanics
http://projecteur.mip.free.fr/contin.htm. Google translation from the French website
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://projecteur.mip.free.fr/contin.htm&sa=X&oi=transla
te&resnum=2&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dbunzli%2B%252B%2Bcontinsouza%2B%252B%2BPathé%
26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG.
Mannone, L. 2007. Leon Ernest Gaumont. Who’s who in Victorian cinema. http://www.victorian-
cinema.net/gaumont.htm
McGahan, A.M. , N. Argyres , and J.A.C. Baum . 2004. Context, technology and strategy: Forging new
perspectives on the industry life cycle. Advances in Strategic Management 21: 1–21.
Moskowitz, G. 1956. The French flair in showmanship. Variety (New York), 4 January, 93.
Mott, F.L. 1938. A history of American magazines, 1865–1885. Vol. 3 London: Oxford University Press.
Narver, J.C. , and S.F. Slater . 1990. The effect of marketing orientation on business profitability. Journal of
Marketing 54, no. 10: 1–18.
New York Times . 1913. Pathé dissatisfied with moving picture industry here. New York Times, 28
December, IV 4:2.
Porter, M.E. 1980. Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York:
Free Press.
Puttnam, D. , and N.with Watson . 1997. The undeclared war: The struggle for control of the world’s film
industry. New York: HarperCollins.
Puttnam, D. , and N.with Watson . 1998. Movies and money. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Reich, L.S. 1992. Lighting the path to profit: GE’s control of the electric lamp industry, 1892–1941. Business
History Review 66, no. 2: 305–335.
Rosenbaum, D.I. , ed. 1998. Market dominance: How firms gain, hold or lose it and the impact on economic
performance. Westport, CT and London: Praeger.
Savada, E. , Comp. 1995. The American Film Institute catalog of motion pictures produced in the United
States – Film beginnings 1893–1910. Metuchen, NJ and London: Scarecrow Press.
Segrave, K. 1997. American films abroad. North Carolina and London: McFarland.
Shepherd, W.G. 1972. The elements of market structure. Review of Economics and Statistics 54: 25–37.
Silver, J.D. 2007. Hollywood’s dominance of the movie industry: How did it arise and how has it been
maintained? PhD diss, Queensland University of Technology. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/16687/.
Thompson, K. 1985. Exporting entertainment: America in the world film market 1907–34. London: BFI.
Vorhies, D.W. , and M. Harker . 2000. The capabilities and performance of market-driven firms: An empirical
investigation. Australian Journal of Management 25, no. 2: 145–172.
Vorhies, D.W. , M. Harker , and C.P. Rao . 1999. The capabilities and performance advantages of market-
driven firms. European Journal of Marketing 33, no. 11/12: 1171–1202.
Vorhies, D.W. , and N.A. Morgan . 2005. Benchmarking marketing capabilities for sustained competitive
advantage. Journal of Marketing 69, no. 1: 80–94.
Wasko, J. 1978. D.W. Griffith and the banks: A case study in film financing. Journal of the University Film
Association 30, no. 1: 31–42.
Zukor, A. , with D. Kramer . 1953. The public is never wrong. New York: G.P. Puttnam’s Sons.
The diffused audience of football
Abercrombie, N. , and B. Longhurst . 1998. Audiences: A sociological theory of performance and
imagination. London: Sage.
Blackshaw, T. , and T. Crabbe . 2004. New perspectives on sport and ‘deviance’: Consumption,
performativity and social control. London and New York: Routledge.
Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Crawford, G. 2004. Consuming sport: Fans, sport and culture. London: Routledge.
Dixon, N. 2001. The ethics of supporting sport teams. Journal of Applied Philosophy 18, no. 2: 149–158.
Dyer, R. 1981. Entertainment and utopia. In Genre: The musical: A reader, ed. Rick Altman , 175–189.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Dyer, R. 1981. 2002. Only entertainment. London: Routledge.
Elias, N. , and E. Dunning . 1986. Quest for excitement: Sport and leisure in the civilizing process. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Fiske, J. 1992. The cultural economy of fandom. In The adoring audience: Fan culture and popular media,
ed. L.A. Lewis , 30–49. London: Routledge.
Giulianotti, R. 1999. Football – A sociology of the global game. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giulianotti, R. 2002. Supporters, followers, fans, and flaneurs. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 26, no. 1:
25–46.
Goksøyr, M. 1998. Football, development and identity in a small nation: Football culture, spectators and
playing styles in twentieth century Norway. Football Studies 1: 37–47.
Goodger, J.M. , and B.C. Goodger . 1989. Excitement and representation: Toward a sociological explanation
of the significance of sport in modern society. Quest 41: 257–272.
Gray, J. , C. Sandvoss , and C.L. Harrington . 2007. Introduction – Why study fans? In Fandom: Identities
and communities in a mediated world, ed. J. Gray , C. Sandvoss , and C.L. Harrington , 1–16. New York and
London: New York University Press.
Guttmann, A. 1986. Sport spectators. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hills, M. 2002. Fan cultures. London and New York: Routledge.
Hjelseth, A. 2006. Mellom børs, katedral og karneval: Norske supporteres forhandlinger om
kommersialisering av fotball [Between stock exchange, cathedral and carnival: Norwegian supporters
negotiating commercialization of football]. Bergen: Sosiologisk institutt, Universitetet i Bergen.
King, A. 1997. New directors, customers, and fans: The transformation of English football in the 1990s.
Sociology of Sport Journal 14: 224–240.
King, A. 2002. The end of the terraces: The transformation of English football in the 1990s. Rev. ed. London
and New York: Leicester University Press.
Kraugerud, H.A. 2005. A gi Trashen et Ansikt [Providing trash TV with a face]. Samtiden 1: 36–44.
Lasch, C. 1988. The degradation of sport. In Philosophic inquiry in sport, ed. W.J. Morgan and K.V. Meier ,
403–417. Champaign and Leeds: Human Kinetics.
Lascu, D. , T. Giese , C. Toolan , B. Guehring , and J. Mercer . 1995. Sport involvement: A relevant
individual difference factor in spectator sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly 4: 41–46.
Mahony, D.F. , R. Madrigal , and D. Howard . 2000. Using the psychological commitment to team (PCT)
scale to segment consumers based on loyalty. Sport Marketing Quarterly 9: 15–25.
Mehus, I. 2005. Sociability and excitement motives of spectators attending entertainment sport events:
Spectators of soccer and ski-jumping. Journal of Sport Behavior 28, no. 4: 333–350.
Sandvoss, C. 2005. Fans: The mirror of consumption. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Spinda, J.S.W. , and P.M. Haridakis . 2008. Exploring the motives of fantasy sports: A uses-and-
gratifications approach. In Sports mania: Essays of fandom and the media in the 21st century, ed. L.W.
Hugenberg , P.M. Haridakis , and A.C. Earnheardt . Jefferson, NC and London: McFarland.
Sutton, W.A. , M.A. McDonald , G.R. Milne , and J. Chimperman . 1997. Creating and fostering fan
identification in professional sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly 6: 15–22.
Trail, G.T. , and J.D. James . 2001. The motivation scale for sport consumption: Assessment of the scale’s
psychometric properties. Journal of Sport Behavior 24, no. 1: 108–127.
Wann, D.L. , and N.R. Branscombe . 1993. Sport fans: Measuring degree of identification with their team.
International Journal of Sport Psychology 24: 1–17.
Watts, R.B. 2008. The Florida Gator Nation Online. In Sports mania: Essays of fandom and the media in the
21st century, ed. L.W. Hugenberg , P.M. Haridakis , and A.C. Earnheardt . Jefferson, NC and London:
McFarland.
Fans teaching fans how to consume
Entertainment. 2005. in Macquarie Little Dictionary, p. 181. The Macquarie Library.
Allen, N.J. and J.P. Meyer . 1990. The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and
normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology 63, no. 1: 1–18.
Arnould, E.J. and C.J. Thompson . 2005. Consumer culture theory (CCT): Twenty years of research. Journal
of Consumer Research 31, no. March: 868–882.
Avrich, B. 2002. Selling the sizzle: The magic and logic of entertainment marketing. Canada: Maxworks
Publishing.
Baldinger, A.L. and J. Rubinson . 1996. Brand loyalty: The link between attitude and behavior. Journal of
Advertising Research 36, no. 6: 22–34.
Baloglu, S. 2002. Dimensions of customer loyalty. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly
February: 47–59.
Baumeister, R.F. and M.R. Leary . 1995. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a
fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin 117, no. 3: 497–529.
Beatty, S.E. and L.R. Kahle . 1988. Alternative hierarchies of the attitude-behavior relationship: The impact
of brand commitment and habit. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16, no. Summer: 1–10.
Belk, R.W. 1988. Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research 15, no. 2: 139–168.
Belk, R.W. , M. Wallendorf and J.F. Sherry . 1989. The sacred and the profane in consumer behavior:
Theodicy on the odyssey. Journal of Consumer Research 16, no. 1: 1–38.
Ben-Eliezer, Y. 1977. The view from Israel. Et cetera 34, no. 1: 39–42.
Bendapudi, N. and L.L. Berry . 1997. Customers’ motivations for maintaining relationships with service
providers. Journal of Retailing 73, no. 1: 15–37.
Benkhoff, B. 1997. A test of the HRM model: Good for employers and employees. Human Resource
Management Journal 7, no. 4: 44–60.
Bird, S.E. 1999. Chatting on cynthia’s porch: Creating community in an e-mail fan group. The Southern
Communication Journal 65, no. 1: 49–65.
Birrell, S. 1981. Sport as ritual: Interpretations from Durkheim to Goffman. Social Forces 60, no. 2: 354–376.
Blanchard, K. 1988. Sport and ritual: A conceptual dilemma. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and
Dance 59, no. 9: 48–52.
Branscombe, N.R. and D.L. Wann . 1991. The positive social and self-concept consequences of sports team
identification. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 15: 115–127.
Buchanan, B. 1974. Building organizational commitment: The socialization of managers in work
organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly 19, no. 4: 533–546.
Burnett, J. , A. Menon and D.T. Smart . 1993. Sports marketing: A new ball game with new rules. Journal of
Advertising Research 33, no. 5: 21–35.
Celsi, R.L. and J.C. Olson . 1988. The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes.
Journal of Consumer Research 15, no. September: 210–224.
Chung, E. , F. Farrelly , M. Beverland and P. Quester . 2005. Exploring consumer fanaticism: A fresh
perspective on the concept of loyalty. In ANZMAC 2005: Broadening the Boundaries, ed. Purchase, S. ,
43–52. Fremantle, WA: The University of Western Australia.
Copeland, M.T. 1923. Relation of consumers’ buying habits to marketing methods. Harvard Business Review
1, no. 3: 282–289.
Crawford, G. 2004. Consuming sport: Fans, sport and culture. Oxon: Routledge.
Crosby, L.A. and J.R. Taylor . 1983. Psychological commitment and its effects on post-decision evaluation
and preference stability among voters. Journal of Consumer Research 9, no. March: 413–431.
d’ Aquili, E.G. and C.D. Laughlin . 1975. The biopsychological determinants of religious ritual behavior.
Zygon 10, no. 1: 32–58.
Daly, W.T. 1977. Ideological fanaticism. Et cetera 34, no. 1: 43–53.
Davis-Floyd, R.E. 1996. Ritual in the hospital: Giving birth the American way. In Readings in ritual studies,
ed. Grimes, RL , 146–158. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Day, G. 1969. A two-dimensional concept of brand loyalty. Journal of Advertising Research 9, no.
September: 29–35.
Donahue, J. 1993. The ritual dimension of karate-do. Journal of Ritual Studies 7, no. 1: 105–124.
Driver, T.F. 1998. Liberating rites. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Durkheim, E. 1912, 1995. The elementary forms of religious life. New York, NY: Free Press.
Dutton, J.E. 2003. Breathing life into organizational studies. Journal of Management Inquiry 12, no. 1: 5–19.
Dwyer, F.R. , P.H. Schurr and S. Oh . 1987. Developing buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing 51,
no. April: 11–27.
Dyer, R. 1973. Light Entertainment. BFI Television Monograph, London: British Film Institute.
East, R. 1997. Consumer behaviour - advances and applications in marketing. Essex: Prentice-Hall.
Eckman, B. 1977. Fanaticism in sports. Et cetera 34, no. 1: 64–70.
Ehrenberg, A.S.C. 1988. Repeat buying: Facts, theory and applications. 2nd ed. Oxford: University Press.
Eitzen, D.S. 1999. American sport at century’s end. Vital Speeches of the Day 65, no. 6: 189–191.
Elsbach, K.D. 1999. An expanded model of organizational identification. Research in Organizational
Behavior 21: 163–200.
Fader, P.S. and D.C. Schmittlein . 1993. Excess behavioral loyalty for high-share brands: Deviations from
the Dirichlet model for repeat purchasing. Journal of Marketing Research 30, November: 478–493.
Fisher, R.J. and K. Wakefield . 1998. Factors leading to group identification: A field study of winners and
losers. Psychology and Marketing 15, no. 1: 23–40.
Fiske, J. 1992. The cultural economy of fandom. In The adoring audience: Fan culture and popular media,
ed. Lewis, L. , 30–49. London: Routledge.
Frederickson, B.L. 2003. The value of positive emotions: The emerging science of positive psychology is
coming to understand why it’s good to feel good. American Scientist 91, no. 4: 330–335.
Freud, S. 1949. Group psychology and the analysis of the ego. London: Hogarth.
Frey, J.H. and D.S. Eitzen . 1991. Sport and society. Annual Review of Sociology 17: 503–522.
Funk, D.C. and D.L. Pastore . 2000. Equating attitudes to allegiance: The usefulness of selected attitudinal
information in segmenting loyalty to professional sports teams. Sport Marketing Quarterly 9, no. 4: 175–184.
Funk, D.C. , L.L. Ridinger and Moorman, M. 2003. Understanding consumer support: Extending the sport
interest inventory (SII) to examine individual differences among women’s professional sport consumers.
Sport Management Review 6: 1–32.
Gladden, J.M. and D.C. Funk . 2001. Understanding brand loyalty in professional sport: Examining the link
between brand association and brand loyalty. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship 3,
no. 2: 67–94.
Goethals, G.T. 1996. Ritual: Ceremony and super Sunday. In Readings in ritual studies, ed. Grimes, RL ,
257–268. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Granskog, J.E. 1993. In search of the ultimate: Ritual aspects of the Hawaiian ironman triathlon. Journal of
Ritual Studies 7, no. 1: 3–25.
Grimes, R.L. 1996. Introduction. In Readings in ritual studies, ed. Grimes, RL , xiii–xv. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gundlach, G.T. , R.S. Achrol and J.T. Mentzer . 1995. The structure of commitment in exchange. Journal of
Marketing 59, no. January: 78–92.
Hofman, M. 2000. Wanted: Compulsive consumers. Inc 22, no. 11: 29–32.
Holbrook, M.B. and E.C. Hirschmann . 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies,
feelings and fun. Journal of Consumer Research 9, no. September: 132–140.
Holt, D.B. 1992. Examining the descriptive value of “Ritual” In consumer behavior: A view from the field.
Advances in Consumer Research 19, no. 1: 213–218.
Homans, G. 1941. Anxiety and ritual: The theories of Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown. American
Anthropologist 43, no. 2: 164–171.
Houston, H.R. 1999. Through pain and perseverance: Liminality, ritual consumption, and the social
construction of gender in contemporary Japan. Advances in Consumer Research 26, no. 1: 542–548.
Ibrahim, H. 1988. The nature of ritual. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 59, no. 9:
25–28.
Jacoby, J. and R.W. Chestnut . 1978. Brand loyalty measurement and management. New York: Wiley.
Jenkins, H. 1992. Textual poachers: Television fans & participatory culture. London: Routledge.
Jennings, T.W. 1982. On ritual knowledge. The Journal of Religion 62, no. 2: 111–127.
Jindra, M. 1994. Star trek fandom as a religious phenomenon. Sociology of Religion 55, no. 1: 27–51.
Kagan, J. 1958. The concept of identification. Psychological Review 65: 296–306.
Kaser, K. and D.B. Oelkers . 2008. Sports and entertainment marketing. 3rd ed. Mason, OH: South-Western
Cengage Learning.
Kertzer, D.I. 1988. Ritual, politics and power. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Kertzer, D.I. 1996. Ritual, politics, and power. In Readings in ritual studies, ed. Grimes, RL , 335–352. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kozinets, R.V. 2001. Utopian enterprise: Articulating the meanings of star trek’s culture of consumption.
Journal of Consumer Research 28, no. 1: 67–88.
La Fontaine, J. 1985. Initiation. Harmondsworth G.B.: Penguin Books.
Madrigal, R. 1995. Cognitive and affective determinants of fan satisfaction with sporting event attendance.
Journal of Leisure Research 27, no. 3: 205–227.
Mael, F. and B.E. Ashforth . 1992. Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of
organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior 13: 103–123.
Mahony, D.F. and D. Howard . 1998. The impact of attitudes on the behavioral intentions of sport spectators.
International Sports Journal 2, no. 2: 96–110.
Malley, B. and J. Barrett . 2003. Can ritual form be predicted from religious belief? A test of the Lawson-
McCauley hypotheses. Journal of Ritual Studies 17, no. 2: 1–14.
Marshall, D.A. 2002. Behavior, belonging, and belief: A theory of ritual practice. Sociological Theory 20, no.
3: 360–380.
Martin, C.L. 1998. Relationship marketing: A high-involvement product attribute approach. Journal of Product
& Brand Management 7, no. 1: 6–26.
Mathieu, J.E. and D.M. Zajac . 1990. A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and
consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin 108: 171–194.
Matsuoka, H. , P. Chelladurai and M. Harada . 2003. Direct and interaction effects of team identification and
satisfaction on intention to attend games. Sport Marketing Quarterly 12, no. 4: 244–253.
McDonald, H. and R.N. Shaw . 2005. The relationship between AFL season-ticket holder satisfaction and
sponsor-related behaviour. In Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference, ed. Purchase,
S. , 36–42. Fremantle: Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy.
McKee, A. and C. Collis . 2009. Bachelor of entertainment industries working paper. Queensland University
of Technology.
Mead, M. 1977. Fanaticism: The panhuman disorder. Et cetera 34, no. 1: 35–38.
Meenaghan, T. and P. O’Sullivan . 1999. Playpower - sports meets marketing. European Journal of
Marketing 33, no. 3/4: 241–249.
Migliore, S. 1993. Professional wrestling: Moral commentary through ritual metaphor. Journal of Ritual
Studies 7, no. 1: 65–84.
Milgram, S. 1977. The social meaning of fanaticism. Et cetera 34, no. 1: 58–61.
Moore, S.F. and B. Myerhoff . 1977. Introduction: Secular ritual: Forms and meanings. In Secular ritual, Eds
Moore, SF and Myerhoff, B. , 3–24. Assen: Van Gorcum.
Morgan, R.M. and S.D. Hunt . 1994. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of
Marketing 58, no. 3: 20–39.
Mottola, G.R. , B.A. Bachman , S.L. Gaertner and J.F. Dovidio . 1997. How groups merge: The effects of
merger integration patterns on anticipated commitment to the merged organization. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology 27, no. 15: 1335–1358.
Muniz, A.M. and T.C. O’Guinn . 2001. Brand community. Journal of Consumer Research 27, no. 4: 412–432.
Murrell, A.D. and B. Dietz . 1992. Fan support of sport teams: The effect of a common group identity. Journal
of Sport and Exercise Psychology 14, no. 1: 28–39.
Oliver, R.L. 1999. Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing 63, no. Special Issue: 33–44.
Otnes, C. , C. M. Nelson and M.A. McGrath . 1995. The children’s birthday party: A study of mothers as
socialization agents. Advances in Consumer Research 22, no. 1: 622–627.
Otnes, C. C. and L.M. Scott . 1996. Something old, something new: Exploring the interaction between ritual
and advertising. The Journal of Advertising XXV, no. 1: 33–50.
Ouwerkerk, J.W. , N. Ellemers and D. de Gilder . 1999. Group commitment and individual effort in
experimental and organizational contexts. In Social identity, Eds Ellemers, N. , Spears, R. and Doosje, B. ,
185–204. Oxford: Blackwell.
Park, C. 1999. The influence of the consumption ritualization on buying behaviors: Department of Distribution
Management, DongEui University.
Pimentel, R.W. and K.E. Reynolds . 2004. A model for consumer devotion: Affective commitment with
proactive sustaining behaviors. Academy of Marketing Science Review 2004, no. 1: 1–45.
Pitts, B.G. and D.K. Stotlar . 2002. Fundamentals of sport marketing. 2 ed. Morgantown, WV: Fitness
Information Technology.
Pritchard, M.P. , M.E. Havitz and D.R. Howard . 1999. Analyzing the commitment-loyalty link in service
contexts. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27, no. 3: 333–348.
Pritchard, M.P. , D. Howard and M.E. Havitz . 1992. Loyalty measurement: A critical examination and
theoretical extension. Leisure Sciences 14, no. April-June: 155–164.
Rappaport, R.A. 1996. The obvious aspects of ritual. In Readings in ritual studies, ed. Grimes, RL , 427–440.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Redden, J. and C.J. Steiner . 2000. Fanatical consumers: Toward a framework for research. Journal of
Consumer Marketing 17, no. 4: 322–335.
Rook, D. 1985. The ritual dimension of consumer behaviour. Journal of Consumer Research 12, no.
December: 251–264.
Sebastian, R. J. and D.N. Bristow . 2000. Win or lose, take me out to the ball game! An empirical
investigation of loyalty proneness among college students. Sport Marketing Quarterly 9, no. 4: 211–220.
Stanley, S.M. and H.J. Markman . 1992. Assessing commitment in personal relationships. Journal of
Marriage and the Family 54, no. August: 595–608.
Sutton, W.A. , M.A. McDonald , G.R. Milne and J. Cimperman . 1997. Creating and fostering fan
identification in professional sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly 6, no. 1: 15–22.
Tajfel, H. 1982. Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology 33: 1–39.
Tambiah, S.J. 1996. A performative approach to ritual. In Readings in ritual studies, ed. Grimes, RL ,
495–511. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Tetreault, M.A.S. and R.E. Kleine . 1990. Ritual, ritualized behavior, and habit: Refinements and extensions
of the consumption ritual construct. Advances in Consumer Research 17: 31–38.
Thorne, S. and G.C. Bruner . 2006. An exploratory investigation of the characteristics of consumer
fanaticism. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 9, no. 1: 51–72.
Turner, V.W. 1969. The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Uncles, M.D. , G.R. Dowling and K. Hammond . 2003. Customer loyalty and customer loyalty programs.
Journal of Consumer Marketing 20, no. 4: 294–316.
Underwood, R. , E. Bond and R. Baer . 2001. Building service brands via social identity: Lessons from the
sports marketplace. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 9, no. 1: 1–11.
Wallace, J.E. 1993. Professional and organizational commitment: Compatible or incompatible? Journal of
Vocational Behavior 42, no. 3: 333–349.
Wann, D.L. and S. Pierce . 2003. Measuring sport team identification and commitment: An empirical
comparison of the sport spectator identification scale and the psychological commitment to team scale. North
American Journal of Psychology 5, no. 3: 365–372.
Warner, W.L. 1959. The living and the dead: A study of the symbolic life of Americans. New Haven CT: Yale
University Press.
Watson, B. 1967. Basic writings of Mu Tzu, Hsun Tzu and Han Fei Tzu. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Wilson, M. 1954. Nyakyusa ritual and symbolism. American Anthropologist 56, no. 2: 228–241.
Wolfe, R.A. , K.E. Weick , J.M. Usher , J.R. Terborg , L. Poppo , A.J. Murrell , J.M. Dukerich , D. Crown Core
, K.E. Dickson and J. Simmonds Jourdan . 2005. Sport and organizational studies: Exploring synergy.
Journal of Management Inquiry 14, no. 2: 182–210.
Zillman, D. and P.B. Paulus . 1993. Spectators: Reactions to sports events and effects on athletic
performance. In Handbook of research on sport psychology, Eds Singer, RN , Murphey, M. and Tennant, LK
, 600–619. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Entertainment industries at university
Barnett, R. 1990. The idea of higher education. Buckingham: SHRE and Open University Press.
Biggs, J. , and C. Tang . 2007. Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: Open University
Press.
Boulton, G. , and C. Lucas . 2008. What are universities for? http://homepage.mac.com/francis-
tasset/.Public/leru-what%20are%20universities%20for-2008.pdf.
Bowden, J. , and F. Marton . 1998. The university of learning: Beyond quality and competence in higher
education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Dyer, R. 1992. Only entertainment. London: Routledge.
Gibson, D. , and W. Hatherell . 1997. Reflections on stability and change in Australian higher education. In
Australia’s future universities, ed. J. Sharpham and G. Harman , 121–136. Armidale: University of New
England Press.
Harvey, L. 2000. New realities: The relationship between higher education and employment. Tertiary
Education and Management 6: 3–17.
Helewitz, J. , and L. Edwards . 2004. Entertainment law. Clifton Park, NY: West Legal
Studies/Thomson/Delmar Learning.
Klein, J. 1990. Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Leinhardt, G. , et al., 1995. Integrating professional knowledge: The theory of practice and the practice of
theory. Learning and Instruction 5: 401–408.
McCalman, J. 2000. Blurred visions. In Why universities matter: A conversation about values, means, and
directions, ed. T. Coady , 132–143. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
McWilliam, E. 2005. Unlearning pedagogy. Journal of Learning Design 1, no. 1: 1–11.
McWilliam, E. , G. Hearn , and B. Haseman . 2008. Transdisciplinarity forcreative futures: Whatbarriers and
opportunities? Innovations in Education and Teaching International 45, no. 3: 247–253.
Sayre, S. , and C. King . 2003. Entertainment and society: Audiences, trends, and impacts. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Scollen, R. 2009. Talking theatre is more than a test drive: Two audience development methodologies under
review. International Journal of Arts Management 12, no. 1: 4–13.
Scott, G. 2008. Review of Australian higher education request for research and analysis: University student
engagement and satisfaction with learning and teaching. Sydney: University of Western Sydney.
Vogel, H. 2007. Entertainment industry economics: A guide for financial analysis. 7th ed. Cambridge and
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Top Gear, top journalism
Baym, Geoffrey . 2005.
The Daily Show
: Discursive integration and the reinvention of political journalism.
Political Communication 22, no. 3: 259–276.
Baym, Geoffrey . 2010. From Cronkite to Colbert: The evolution of broadcast news. Boulder: Paradigm.
Blundell, Graeme . 2010. Blokey bonhomie in the fast lane. The Australian, 16 February.
British Broadcasting Corporation . n.d. Jeremy Clarkson,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/team/jeremy_clarkson.shtml.
Cunningham, Brent . 2003. Re-thinking objectivity. Columbia Journalism Review 42, no. 2: 24–32.
Dahlgren, Peter . 1992. Journalism as popular culture: Introduction. In Journalism and popular culture, ed.
Peter Dahlgren and Colin Sparks , 1–23. London: Sage.
Dahlgren, Peter . 1995. Television and the public sphere. London: Sage.
Fiske, John . 1987. Television culture. London: Routledge.
Fiske, John . 1989. Reading the popular. Boston: Hyman.
Fox, Tiffany . 2010. TV bites. The West Australian, 16 February.
Gray, Jonathan . 2008. Television entertainment. New York: Routledge.
Hall, Allan , and Henry Meller . 2005. Clarkson blitzkrieg. Daily Mail, 15 December.
Hallin, Daniel C. 1994. We keep America on top of the world: Television journalism and the public sphere.
London: Routledge.
Harrington, Stephen . 2008. Popular news in the twenty-first century: Time for a new critical approach?
Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism 9, no. 3: 266–284.
Harrington, Stephen . 2009. Not all journalisms are in crisis: Unorthodox news forms and public knowledge.
Paper presented at the Journalism in Crisis conference, 19–20 May, University of Westminster, London.
Harrington, Stephen . 2010. Waking up with friends: Breakfast news,
Sunrise
and the ‘televisual sphere’.
Journalism Studies 11, no. 2: 175–189.
Hartley, John . 2008. Television truths. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Katz, Jon . 1992. Rock, rap and movies bring you the news. Rolling Stone, 5 March.
Katz, Jon . 1993. The media’s war on kids. Rolling Stone, 25 November.
Kovach, Bill , and Tom Rosenstiel . 2001. The elements of journalism. New York: Three Rivers Press.
Lewis, Justin . 1991. The ideological octopus: An exploration of television and its audience. New York:
Routledge.
Lumby, Catharine . 2002. The future of journalism. In The media and communications in Australia, ed. Stuart
Cunningham and Graeme Turner , 320–329. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
McNair, Brian . 2006. Cultural chaos: Journalism, news and power in a globalised world. London: Routledge.
McWhirter, Erin . 2010.
Top Gear
zooms to no. 1. Daily Telegraph, 18 February.
Meaden, Richard . 2007. Audi’s moment of truth.
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/206857/audi_r8.html.
Morley, David . 1999. Finding out about the world from television news: Some difficulties. In Television and
common knowledge, ed. Jostein Gripsrud , 136–158. London: Routledge.
qmediagroup . n.d. The Car Show. http://www.qmedia.com.au/thecarshow.html.
Shearer, Geoff . 2010. Nine’s line-up jolts networks into top gear for ratings time. The Courier Mail, 18
February.
Stephenson, David . 2005. Why BBC is becoming a real turn-off. The Express on Sunday, 18 December.
Turner, Graeme . 2005. Ending the affair: The decline of television current affairs in Australia. Sydney:
University of New South Wales Press.
Vickery, Colin , and Gemma Quade . 2010. Clarkson drives point home. The Advertiser, 11 February.
Wickham, Phil . 2007. Understanding television texts. London: British Film Institute.
Transmedia Storytelling and Entertainment
Bordwell, David . 2009. Now leaving Platform 1. Observations on Film Art, 19 August.
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/?p=5264.
Crafton, Donald . 1993. Before Mickey: The animated film, 1898–1928. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Davidson, Drew . 2010. Cross-media communications: An introduction to the art of creating integrated media
experiences. Pittsburgh: Lula Press.
Jenkins, Henry . 2003. Transmedia storytelling. Technology Review, 15 January.
http://www.technologyreview.com/Biotech/13052/?a=f.
Norman, Donald . 2009. The transmedia design challenge: Co-creation.,
http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/the_transmedia_design_challenge_co-creation.html.
Rose, Mark . Ongoing. Deep Media., http://www.deepmediaonline.com/.
Tryon, Chuck . 2009. Reinventing cinema: Movies in the age of media convergence. Piscataway, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.
What is Transmedia? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyjg6–7LJPg&feature=related.
Futures of Entertainment: Cult Media.
http://www.convergenceculture.org/futuresofentertainment/2007/program/index.html.
Futures of Entertainment: Fan Labor.
http://www.convergenceculture.org/futuresofentertainment/2007/program/index.html.
Futures of Entertainment: Global Media.
http://henryjenkins.org/2009/01/how_brazil_is_reshaping_the_fu.html.
Futures of Entertainment: Transmedia Activism.
http://henryjenkins.org/2009/12/on_chuck_and_carrot_mobs_mappi.html.
Futures of Entertainment: Fan Cultures.
http://cms.mit.edu/news/2006/12/futures_of_entertainment_2006_5.php.
Futures of Entertainment: Franchising and World Building.
http://techtv.mit.edu/collections/convergenceculture/videos/1607-futures-of-entertainment-3–-session-5-
franchising-extensions-and-worldbuilding.
Futures of Entertainment: Transmedia Properties.
http://cms.mit.edu/news/2006/12/futures_of_entertainment_2006_3.php.
Defining ARGS. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h80PpcV_kug.
Creativity and Social Media. http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/uploaded_images/Screen-shot-2010-01-27-at-
2.25.52-PM-Jan-27,-2010-725160.png.
Transmedia Hollywood – COMING SOON.
Blair Witch Project
Case Study. http://current.com/items/90751614_blair-witch-producer-reveals-fan-building-
that-drove-distribution.htm.
J.J. Abrams. http://www.ted.com/talks/j_j_abrams_mystery_box.html.
Jeff Gomez. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfH8WwClSx0.
http://vimeo.com/8842277.
Joshua Green. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bci5zSOFABM&feature=related.
Henry Jenkins. http://vimeo.com/4672634.
Geoffrey Long. http://videolog.uol.com.br/video.php?id=481038.
Alex McDowell. http://futuresofentertainment.org/2009/08/foe-3-when-comics-converge-making--watchmen/.
Mark Warshaw and Jesse Alexander. http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/538.
Lance Weiller. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCPEq2_8Lxg.
