Summary of “What it’s like to be on House Hunters and House Hunters International.”

So I’m going to tell you all about my experience with House Hunters International, on which we appeared in 2017, and House Hunters, which we filmed last winter.
The first thing you need to know is that in neither episode of House Hunters were Jeff and I actually house hunting.
House Hunters International is always looking for people who have moved abroad to feature on the show.
The show is intended to resemble a real-life house hunt, but exaggerated for TV. So you take your real-world wants, and in each house you visit, you ham that up.
In House Hunters International I mentioned that I wanted a bathtub, something that is nearly impossible to find in the Netherlands.
In our House Hunters International episode, Jeff is portrayed as wanting a small house that is close to work no matter what.
So when we moved back to the United States, we got in contact with the House Hunters production company, which is different than the House Hunters International production company.
We haven’t seen the episode yet, but I already know it turns on Jeff not being satisfied with any house and all the little home-repair problems he finds when house hunting.

The orginal article.

Summary of “How Drag Became America’s New National Pastime”

Then came RuPaul’s Drag Race, the reality competition, which yanked drag from the periphery and not only returned RuPaul to stardom but gave contoured, breast-plated birth to some 140 new little novas.
“Our show is being seen around the world and it’s introduced drag to people who have never even heard of it. Before that, drag was in the subversive clubs. In fact, even in clubs, it was in a place where it wasn’t celebrated. Around the time that our show went on the air, there was nothing. Girls were performing at restaurants without even a stage. Without even proper lighting.”
“Certainly in the past year or two, major corporations seem far more comfortable with drag than they’ve ever been,” says Randy Barbato, the co-founder of World of Wonder, the production company that makes Drag Race and its satellites, RuPaul’s Drag Race All Stars and Untucked.
“Our little drag show has become a cultural phenomenon,” the man in those gowns said from the stage of the Orpheum Theatre during the winner-crowning finale of the 11th season of Drag Race last month, addressing “The millions of fans watching on VH1 and around the globe.”
Frankie Sharp, a New York events producer who has had Drag Race alumnae at his parties at bars like Metropolitan, Dream Downtown, and 3 Dollar Bill, confirms this.
As they filter into the world and get a piece of it, so does RuPaul, who is testing a daytime talk show – out of drag but along drag principles, he said – on Fox stations in seven markets beginning June 10.
Then there are the new Drag Races with their promise of the new: World of Wonder has licensed the show format in Chile and in Thailand, which in particular brings pyrotechnics and passion that have reinvigorated interest among die-hard fans.
Some in the drag scene complain that Drag Race’s success has given it has a monopoly on star-making, cutting off the club circuit and elevating its own version of drag above all others.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Mr. Rogers Had a Simple Set of Rules for Talking to Children”

Fred Rogers on the set of Mr. Rogers’s Neighborhood in 1993.
Once, Rogers provided new lyrics for the “Tomorrow” song that ended each show to ensure that children watching on Friday wouldn’t expect a show on Saturday, when the show didn’t air.
Rogers was extraordinarily good at imagining where children’s minds might go.
Hedda Sharapan, one of the staff members at Fred Rogers’s production company, Family Communications, Inc., recalls Rogers once halted taping of a show when a cast member told the puppet Henrietta Pussycat not to cry; he interrupted shooting to make it clear that his show would never suggest to children that they not cry.
In working on the show, Rogers interacted extensively with academic researchers.
Rogers learned the highest standards in this emerging academic field, and he applied them to his program for almost half a century.
“I spent hours talking with Fred and taking notes,” says Greenwald, “Then hours talking with Margaret McFarland before I went off and wrote the scripts. Then Fred made them better.” As simple as Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood looked and sounded, every detail in it was the product of a tremendously careful, academically-informed process.
Maxwell King is the CEO of the Pittsburgh Foundation and the former director of the Fred Rogers Center.

The orginal article.

Summary of “On coming out as transgender in Donald Trump’s America”

In the dream, I wore jeans and a T-shirt, but unmistakably women’s jeans and a T-shirt.
The day after I started hormone replacement therapy, which will slowly but surely feminize my lumpy 30-something body, the New York Times reported that the Trump administration was thinking about defining gender as “a biological, immutable condition determined by genitalia at birth.” The move would effectively legislate transgender Americans “Out of existence” in the eyes of the government, as part of a larger effort “To roll back recognition and protections of transgender people under federal civil rights law.”
Its story of a world where women are subjugated and held captive to be ritually raped once per month in hopes of producing a child carried with it an unspoken warning: Here was the end result of unchecked theocratic rule! Beware!
Even the women who persecute other women on this show are signal flares for a community not yet realized but understood.
In some small way, The Handmaid’s Tale spurred me to confront my gender, because it forced me to think about the rural small town where I grew up, the fundamentalist Christian churches I attended in my most formative years, and all the ways that women were subtly reduced within those communities to elevate the primacy of men.
Whatever caste the women of the show belong to, they are defined less by their personhood than by the part they play in a series of deeply codified rituals.
Growing up, the women I knew were often the worriers.
I’m trying to learn from the women in my life who have defied the expectations placed upon them, in ways big and small, women like my wife and my sister and my best friend and my boss.

The orginal article.

Summary of “TV’s Reckoning with #MeToo”

The heroines of the show, a sweet, loopy friendship sitcom, are a raunchy toucan named Tuca and her best friend, an anxious parakeet named Bertie.
These stories, which were packaged as “Very special episodes,” were regularly treated as big cultural events-maybe because they stood in striking contrast to the way sexual violence was portrayed on crime shows and soaps, which tended to be hardboiled or lurid.
As with Bertie, on “Tuca and Bertie,” women on these shows are enablers as well as victims, and sometimes both.
On the second season of “GLOW,” the Netflix series about female wrestlers in the nineteen-eighties, Ruth Wilder is hit on by the head of her show’s network-and, when she refuses to sleep with him, he pulls the show from prime time and her best friend berates her for her naïveté, arguing that it was her job to string him along.
“Younger,” a sweet, smart show on TV Land, which premièred in 2015, faced a tougher set of circumstances.
“The Good Fight” is a broadly satirical show, as surreal in its way as “Tuca and Bertie,” and not a gentle romance like “Younger” or “Jane the Virgin.” But, even in a darker series, one obsessed with corruption, the choice to show its central characters as near-villains feels significant.
Even Diane Lockhart, the show’s feminist heroine, who has spent the show’s run obsessed with Donald Trump’s sexism, is key to the coverup.
TV shows, unlike novels, are never truly unaware of their audience: if they are, they don’t get renewed.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Neil Gaiman: ‘Good Omens feels more apt now than it did 30 years ago'”

You’d never know from watching Good Omens, Neil Gaiman’s effervescent apocalyptic comedy of errors, that he started writing it fresh off the plane from the funeral of his friend Terry Pratchett, when “Nothing seemed funny”.
After “All of the fanciest writers that we could find and think of” had turned the job down, Gaiman promised to adapt their co-written 1990 novel himself; and when Pratchett died in the spring of 2015, “Suddenly it was a last request”.
Having made the pledge, Gaiman said when we met recently in New York, he “Knew that I couldn’t just invent it, write it down and give it to somebody and go: ‘OK, I’m done,’ because at that point anything could happen”, so he plunged in as showrunner, making all the creative calls himself and cast it partly from “My address book”.
Writing the show alone, Gaiman says, was “Really horrible”, especially at those moments when he got stuck on something or “Whenever I did something clever” and Pratchett wasn’t there to appreciate it.
At the heart of Good Omens is a platonic love affair between two blokes, the demon Crowley and the angel Aziraphale, who gradually figure out that since “Our respective head offices don’t actually care how things get done, they just want to know they can cross it off the list”, they may as well surreptitiously cooperate rather than constantly cancelling out one another’s good or evil efforts.
Coming up with that sequence, Gaiman says, in which the demon has to “Keep dancing like a man on hot sand at the beach,” was “The moment in the writing process that I knew I wanted David Tennant”.
One of the sharper insights in Good Omens is that the interests of heaven and hell aren’t really so misaligned, something Gaiman drives home by departing from the source material to show the audience both sets of headquarters – heaven’s a glossy, Apple Mac-white fantasia presided over by a troupe of gleefully war-mongering bureaucrats led by Jon Hamm as the angel Gabriel, who informs Aziraphale that “I’m afraid we have other things to do. The earth isn’t going to just end itself, you know.”
Being the showrunner – which he agreed to do because he felt a number of previous TV projects had been unnecessarily screwed up by other people – halted his usually prolific writing, and he is now keen to get back to the sequel to Neverwhere he had to abandon two years ago.

The orginal article.

Summary of “IR Theory and ‘Game of Thrones’ Are Both Fantasies – Foreign Policy”

Since the start of the series, Game of Thrones has been catnip for scholars of world politics and foreign policy.
It would be hard to imagine a fantasy world better concocted to appeal to international relations scholars than that of Westeros, the setting of Game of Thrones.
One scholar points out that Game of Thrones is more a romance of the early modern European age than of the medieval period.
Since at least the publication of Hans Morgenthau’s Politics Among Nations in 1948-which defined international politics as a “Struggle for power”-U.S. international relations theory has done the same, plundering disparate parts of European history to construct plausible arguments about the underlying processes of politics.
As Cynthia Weber writes, “IR theory – a collection of stories about international politics – relies on IR myths in order to appear to be true.” And since both Martin and Morgenthau were looking backward to an imagined European past, they took as natural concepts such as sovereignty and interstate war that loom large in those stories.
When international relations theorists encountered Game of Thrones they were excited to discover a text that grappled with questions of power, violence, authority, and the importance of individuals versus structure.
There’s a quiet revolution going on now, as scholars turn from broadly theorizing about how the original Star Trek explained 1960s U.S. foreign policy toward more rigorous studies.
These studies point to one way that scholars can continue to take popular culture seriously: seeking not to catalogue instances in which Game of Thrones reflects the world but rather how its reception shows that audiences understand politics-and even how the show might have changed their perceptions of how power works.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Chester Pierce: The Forgotten Tale of How a Black Psychiatrist Helped Make ‘Sesame Street'”

In the wake of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. on April 4, 1968, a newly formed group called the Black Psychiatrists of America began to challenge their white colleagues to think about racism in a new way.
Unlike many of their liberal white colleagues, who were fascinated by the potential mental pathologies of individual racists, the Black Psychiatrists of America insisted that racism was built into the systems and structures of American life, including psychiatry itself.
Chester Pierce-the founding president of the Black Psychiatrists of America-was most concerned about the pernicious influence of one institution in particular: television.
From a public health standpoint, he believed, television was a prime “Carrier” of demeaning messages that undermined the mental health of vulnerable young black children in particular.
It seemed to Pierce that the same technology that risked creating another generation of psychically damaged black children could also be used as a radical therapeutic intervention.
As he told his colleagues within the Black Psychiatrists of America in 1970: “Many of you know that for years I have been convinced that our ultimate enemies and deliverers are the education system and the mass media.” “We must,” he continued, “Without theoretical squeamishness over correctness of our expertise, offer what fractions of truth we can to make education and mass media serve rather than to oppress the black people of this country.”
Knowing how Pierce saw the matter explains why, shortly after the founding of the Black Psychiatrists of America, he became personally involved in helping to design a new kind of television show targeted at preschool children.
“It seemed to Pierce that the same technology that risked creating another generation of psychically damaged black children could also be used as a radical therapeutic intervention.”

The orginal article.

Summary of “How we made Parks and Recreation, by Amy Poehler, Nick Offerman and Mike Schur”

Mike Schur and I worked together at Saturday Night Live; he wrote Leslie with me in mind.
Nick Offerman and I are very similar in real life – we like to laugh and work but we’re strong willed and strong minded.
A few years later, he remembered the Post-it and said: “I want this guy on my new show.” NBC looked at me for one role and said: “This guy is going to have to kiss Rashida Jones at some point, and we don’t think Nick is visually in that category.” Mike said: “OK, let’s cast him as Leslie Knope’s boss.”
It started with a pretty simple idea: a libertarian who hated government, working as director of parks and recreation.
Mike is an incredible brain with a compassionate heart – and being on a team with Amy Poehler as its co-captain, it was Christmas every week.
I’d worked with Amy on Saturday Night Live and knew she was one of those people.
NBC said they’d launch the show after the Superbowl, but Amy was due to give birth the week we had to shoot the pilot.
We felt Amy gave us the best chance for the show to work.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Interview: Jordan Klepper on His New Comedy Central Show”

Not long after joining The Daily Show as a correspondent in 2014, Klepper became a late-night favorite for his field pieces getting to know Donald Trump supporters in the lead-up to the 2016 election.
His popularity on The Daily Show ultimately led to him hosting his own show at Comedy Central, The Opposition, in which he took his right-wing Daily Show character to Infowars-inspired extremes.
Ahead of tonight’s premiere of the eight-part series, we spoke with Klepper about his approach to the new show, balancing comedy with serious topics, and how he learned to amplify issues other people care about without doing something The Opposition’s Jordan Klepper did well: making it all about him.
The new show covers a pretty interesting variety of topics.
How did you and your team land on what the topics would be for each episode?The show kind of evolved as we started going out, booking things, and bringing stuff back, and we started to see the story tell itself.
It’s sort of a luxury you have when you’re doing something that feels more like a documentary and less like a Daily Show piece where you go out practically knowing the story you’re going to tell because of preinterviews and because you’re tied to a five-minute [segment].
If we’re doing a show right now, I’ve done a show at The Daily Show where you are ironically detached, and you use that as a weapon to tell a story.
Which is a big challenge when you come back and you’re like, But we’re making a show about these topics for Comedy Central! But I think that was a good challenge for us.

The orginal article.