What if TV shows could get you hooked on politics?

Do political TV shows do more bad than good to politics? Series like House of Cards, The West Wing, Borgen or Scandal are increasingly popular, and yet we keep seeing an increase in abstention from voting and more and more people disgruntled with real life politics. Are we falling out of love with politics because of fictional TV dramas? Or are these shows reflecting our settled-in disappointment in our elected officials?

One thing is certain: cultural products, including television shows, and especially the ones we binge on for hours on end, have influential power on us. So when we’re watching series that are based on politics, we should be aware of the effect it may have on our views of government, our political decisions, and so on.

I’ve chosen to write this editorial highly inspired by Master’s student Valentine Serino’s graduating thesis entitled “Political-Fiction? Political-Spectacle?” In her work, Valentine explores the use of power in political TV shows through three popular series: The West Wing, Danish series Borgen (very popular in Europe) and House of Cards. She studies the relation between peoples’ engagement in fictional political TV series versus their engagement in real life politics, and I found that her research and analysis would be of interest to many of us since, who here isn’t hooked on House of Cards?

Every one of us who has watched fictional political TV series has wondered, how much of what happens in these shows is real? The verb ? to represent ? has several definitions. It can mean to act, put on a show, play out a scene. But it also signifies to stand for or act in the place of – to incarnate the ideas of a community, to voice their opinions and legally speak for people. These meanings are similar, but could it be pure coincidence that one same word describes both the vocation of an actor and that of a politician exerting in a democracy? It’s hard to believe.

Political TV series seem to be the new way to talk about politics on television. Before 1999, political TV series were not very common – in fact, it was not an attractive genre of television at all. But starting in September 1999, millions of people became hooked on The West Wing. Fifteen years later, political TV series are popping up everywhere, from Scandal to Borgen to House of Cards, and many are definitely considered “cool.”

So how have political TV series won our attention?

First of all, we can learn a lot from them. Though not as complete as an academic or philosophical work of political science, a TV series can allow for easier comprehension of the functions and roles of different political institutions and actors. Through twists and turns of plots, viewers witness first-hand the internal balances of power along with the complex relationships between politicians and the media. We learn from these shows, and see the branches of government in action – in a much richer sense than what we get from real life politics in the news.

Of course, it would be foolish to presume that fictional TV series are a 100% accurate depiction of political activity. In fact, these political TV series are mostly reflections given by a deformed mirror - whether they reveal a more idealistic, realistic, cynical or humoristic version of reality, the angle is often determined by the circumstances of the time. The West Wing, which started airing at the beginning of the 2000s, tried to re-enchant audiences with politics just after the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal and the beginning of George W. Bush’s first term in office. House of Cards on the other hand, illustrates our ever-increasing distrust of our politicians. And yet, even if Frank Underwood is Manipulation-incarnated, he still has higher popularity ratings than Barack Obama.

So what else is it about political TV series that make them attractive to more and more viewers every season? How have they become pop culture references, at the same time as our government arouses less and less hope and enthusiasm?

These political TV series bring together information, communication and entertainment. Aside from watching fictional political characters exert their roles on TV, the audience is given privileged access into the lives and minds of (fictional) politicians.

This transparency is exemplified by bringing viewers through the deepest corridors of power and its artifice. In House of Cards, Frank Underwood even goes so far as to breaking the fourth wall, turning directly to the camera and letting the audience in on his deepest confidences. We actually get to know more about what goes on inside the most powerful politician’s mind than the officials around him (and even his own wife). In real life, what politicians say in the public space is, well, usually, not a lot.

Another reason why these TV shows are more attractive than actual politics is the fact that fictional characters are often depicted as genuinely good and selfless. In the Danish series Borgen, Birgit Nyborg is named prime minister without even having campaigned for the role – she simply wanted to express the views of the centrist party in a public debate. TV shows can show an ideal model of democracy – one that we may no longer believe in, seeing that less and less people feel like they are represented in government or even have a strong sense of community.

Finally, the format of a series makes it easy for citizen-viewers to engage in the world of fictive politics: it rhythmically enters peoples’ weekly routine at the diffusion rate of the episodes, all while creating a consistent whole for the entire season.

In short, these series ensure the narration of a political story that is both enticing and makes sense. Ultimately, TV series are becoming not only audiovisual and cultural references, but also political benchmarks. Audiences, especially on social networks, are progressively using their knowledge gained from fictional TV to explain, decrypt, and expose political realities that are sometimes hard to grasp for the uninitiated. What if in the end, these political television series were a step towards making government more popular, and even more democratic?