Co-viewing refers to the practice of sitting together in front of a TV set, watching and making meaning from television content. New media amplifies the possibilities for co-viewing, by allowing people to do it virtually. This study explores the reflexive perception of media realism that emerged when Facebook users engaged in connected co-viewing in two unofficial Facebook groups dedicated to the Brazilian prime-time telenovela Babilônia. The series’ controversial plot led to political discussions and prompted debate where viewers frequently used their perceptions of realism to counter the notion of media effects.
AngIen. 1985. Watching Dallas: Soap Opera and the Melodramatic Imagination. New York: Methuen Publishing.
2.
AtencioRebecca J.2014. Memory’s Turn: Reckoning with Dictatorship in Brazil. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
3.
BallSamuelBogatzGerryCreechReidEllsworthRandolphLandesSandra. 1970. “The First Year of Sesame Street: An Evaluation.” ETS, Report, October. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED047823.pdf.
BusselleRick W.GreenbergBradley S.. 2000. “The Nature of Television Realism Judgments: A Reevaluation of Their Conceptualization and Measurement.” Mass Communication & Society3 (2–3): 249–68. doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0323_05.
7.
CohenElizabethLancasterAlexander. 2014. “Individual Differences in in-Person and Social Media Television Co-viewing: The Role of Emotional Contagion, Need to Belong, and Co-viewing Orientation.” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking17 (8): 512–18. doi:10.1089/cyber.2013.0484.
8.
DorrAimeeKovaricPeterDoubledayCatherine.1989. “Parent-child Co-viewing of Television.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media33 (1): 35–51. doi:10.1080/08838158909364060.
9.
EynonRebeccaFryJennySchroederRalph. 2008. “The Ethics of Internet Research.” In SAGE Internet Research Methods, edited by HughesJason, 23–41. London: Sage.
10.
FechineYvanaGouveiaDiegoTeixeiraCristinaAlmeidaCecíliaCostaMarcelaCavalcantiGêsa. 2015. “Governo da participação: uma discussão sobre processos internacionais em ações transmídias a partir da teledramaturgia da Globo.” [Managing participation: a discussion about the international process and transmedia actions in the Globo network drama production]. In Por Uma Teoria De Fãs Da Ficção Televisiva Brasileira, edited by de LopesMaria Immacolata Vassallo, 321–56. Porto Alegre: Sulina.
11.
FerreiraRaquelSantanaDhione O.. 2013. “La fuerza de la costumbre: un estudio sobre la tradición temática de las telenovelas de la red Globo por franja horaria.” [The strength of the habit: a study of the thematic tradition of Globo telenovelas by time slot]. Palabra Clave16 (1): 215–39. doi:10.5294/pacla.2013.16.1.8.
12.
HallAlice. 2003. “Reading Realism: Audiences’ Evaluations of the Reality of Media Texts.” Journal of Communication53 (4): 624–41. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02914.x.
13.
HaridakisPaulHansonGary. 2009. “Social Interaction and Co-viewing with YouTube: Blending Mass Communication Reception and Social Connection.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media53 (2): 317–35. doi:10.1080/08838150902908270.
14.
HoltJenniferSansonKevin. 2014. “Introduction.” In Connected Viewing: Selling, Streaming, & Sharing Media in the Digital Era, edited by HoltJenniferSansonKevin, 1–17. New York: Routledge.
15.
HyunyiChoLijiangShenKariWilson. 2014. “Perceived Realism: Dimensions and Roles in Narrative Persuasion.” Communication Research41 (6): 828–51. doi:10.1177/0093650212450585.
16.
JacksNildaRonsiniVenezaPiedrasElisaSchimitzDanielaOikawaErikaSilvaLourdesPienizMônicaet al. 2011. “Telenovela em múltiplas telas: da circulação ao consume.” [Telenovela in multiple screens: circulation and consumption]. In Ficção televisiva transmidiática no Brasil: plataformas, convergência, comunidades virtuais [Transmedia television drama in Brazil: platforms convergence and virtual communities], edited by de LopesMaria Immacolata Vassallo, 297–338. Porto Alegre: Sulina.
La PastinaAntonio. 2001. “Product Placement in Brazilian Prime Time Television: The Case of the Reception of a Telenovela.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media45 (4): 541–57. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4504_1.
19.
La PastinaAntonioJoyceSamantha. 2015. “Changing GLBTQ Representations: The Sexual Other in Brazilian Telenovelas.” Lumina8 (2): 1–27.
20.
LivingstoneSonia. 2008. “Engaging with Media: A Matter of Literacy?” Communication, Culture and Critique1 (1): 51–62. doi:10.1111/j.1753-9137.2007.00006.x.
21.
LopesMaria Immacolata Vassallo. 2012. “A case study on transmedia reception: Fandom on facebook and social issues in the Brazilian telenovela Passione”. Anàlisi: Quaderns De Comunicació i Cultura (Monogràfic [Special Issue]: Audiovisual 2.0): 111–32.
22.
LopesMaria Immacolata VassalloMungioliMaria Cristina PalmaFreireClaudiaKarhawiIssaafLemosLigia Maria PreziaArrudaNeideTorreglossaSilvia. 2011. “Telenovela em múltiplas telas: da circulação ao consume.” In Ficção televisiva transmidiática no Brasil: plataformas, convergência, comunidades virtuais [Transmedia television drama in Brazil: platforms convergence and virtual communities], edited by de LopesMaria Immacolata Vassallo, 241–96. Porto Alegre: Sulina.
23.
LopesMaria Immacolata VassalloMungioliMaria Cristina PalmaGrecoClariceFreireClaudiaLemosLigia Maria PreziaBernadazziRafaela. “Das ficções às conversações: A transmidiação do conteúdo ficcional na fan page da Globo.” In Estratégias de Transmidiação na Ficção Televisiva Brasileira [Strategies of transmediation in the Brazilian Television drama], edited by de LopesMaria Immacolata Vassallo, 135–78. Porto Alegre: Sulina.
24.
LullJames. 1990. Inside Family Viewing—Ethnografic Research on Television’s Audience. London: Routledge.
25.
McDonaldDaniel G.1986. “Generational Aspects of Television Co-viewing.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media30 (1): 75–85. doi:10.1080/08838158609386609.
26.
MoeHallvardPoellThomasDijckJosé van. 2016. “Rearticulating Audience Engagement: Social Media and Television.” Television & New Media17 (2): 99–107. doi:10.1177/1527476415616194.
27.
OrtizRenatoBorelliSilvia Helena SimõesRamosJosé Mario Ortiz. 1989. Telenovela: História e Produção [Telenovela: History and Production]. São Paulo: Brasiliense.
28.
Padilla-WalkerLaura M.CoyneSarah M.FraserAshley M.DyerWilliam JustinYorgasonJeremy B.2012. “Parents and Adolescents Growing up in the Digital Age: Latent Growth Curve Analysis of Proactive Media Monitoring.” Journal of Adolescence35 (5): 1153–65. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.03.005.
Pires de SáFernandaRoigAntoni. 2016. “Challenging Prime Time Television: Co-viewing Practices in the Brazilian Telenovela.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies22 (4): 392–407. doi:10.1177/1354856516641623.
RonsiniVenezaBrignolLilianeStorchLauraMarquesCamilaFolettoLauraCorrêaLuiza. 2015. “Ativismo de fãs e disputas de sentidos de gênero nas interações da audiência de Em Família nas redes sociais.” In Por Uma Teoria De Fãs Da Ficção Televisiva Brasileira [For a fan theory in the Brazilian Television drama], edited by de LopesMaria Immacolata Vassallo, 197–238. Porto Alegre: Sulina.
33.
SchiavoMarcio Ruiz. 2002. “Merchandising Social: as telenovelas e a construção da cidadania” [Social Merchandising: telenovelas and the construction of citizenship]. Paper presented at Intercom—Sociedade Brasileira de Estudos Interdisciplinares da Comunicação XXV Congresso Brasileiro de Ciências da Comunicação, Salvador, September 1–5. http://www.intercom.org.br/papers/nacionais/2002/congresso2002_anais/2002_NP14SCHIAVO.pdf.
34.
SchiavoMarcio Ruiz. 2006. “Dez Anos de Merchandising Social” [Ten years of social merchansiding]. Paper presented at Intercom—Sociedade Brasileira de Estudos Interdisciplinares da Comunicação XXIX Congresso Brasileiro de Ciências da Comunicação, Brasília, September 6–9. http://www.intercom.org.br/papers/nacionais/2006/resumos/R1820-1.pdf.
