Act Four: What should a 'women's network' be airing?

Reality shows and soap operas don't have to be lesser genres. And women aren't bad for enjoying them.   Alyssa Rosenberg on culture and politics   Jeffrey Bowyer-Chapman as Jay, Shiri Appleby as Rachel, Amy Hill as Dr. Wagerstein and Constance Zimmer as Quinn in Season 2 of Lifetime's “UnREAL.” (Lifetime) Every week, I answer a question from the previous Monday’s Act Four Live chat in the Wednesday edition of this newsletter. You can read the transcript of the Feb. 27 chat here and submit questions for the March 6 chat here. This week, a reader asks about the rebranding of the Lifetime network. I was happy to see that Lifetime will support the National Women's Soccer League by televising their games. It got me thinking. Can Lifetime become the actual network for women? Hire women creators, showcase women in sports, create diverse content, etc. They could be doing so much, and they’re wasting their potential. If you see Lifetime is rebranding, it’s worth noting the role that “UnREAL,” the network’s savage satire of the “Bachelor” franchise has played in that pivot. “UnREAL” was a lot better in its first season than its second, but the fact that the show ended up on Lifetime at all suggested that the network recognized that women are aware that reality series like that are highly manipulated and are at least as interested in the mechanisms that produce the drama on a show like “The Bachelor” as the drama itself. That said, I think we should step back for a minute. The way you talk about what a network for women should be implies that certain categories of entertainment, or certain tones or subjects, aren’t really for women, that they’re just foisted on women who either make the mistake of falling for a corporate pitch, or who settle. I certainly think a network for women could try to reflect a broad range of women’s interests, which include sports. But there are a lot of valuable things about storytelling that’s soapy and domestic and romantic. It’s one thing to push for great execution of reality television, soap operas and romances. It’s another to suggest that telling those stories is a waste of potential. ADVERTISEMENT   Stop treating the women in Trump’s world like we treated Hillary Clinton The fictions we tell ourselves about Kellyanne Conway, Ivanka Trump and Melania Trump tell us more about us than about them. By Alyssa Rosenberg  •  Read more »   As TV’s visual ambitions get bigger, Americans are choosing smaller screens The number of televisions in American households are shrinking, even as TV is telling stories that demand bigger canvases. By Alyssa Rosenberg  •  Read more »   The five best things that could come out of the 2017 Oscars Let's see Mahershala Ali in a romantic comedy, Janelle Monáe in everything and a Damien Chazelle movie that doesn't involve jazz. By Alyssa Rosenberg  •  Read more »   At the Oscars, stars avoided liberal stereotypes — and speaking Trump’s name Artists occasionally missed opportunities, but they didn't embarrass themselves, either. And they refused to speak the president's name. By Alyssa Rosenberg  •  Read more »   The insane end of the Oscars sent a false message about racial progress "La La Land" didn't have to be humiliated for "Moonlight" to win. By Alyssa Rosenberg  •  Read more »   ADVERTISEMENT   Recommended for you   Today's WorldView What's most important from where the world meets Washington, plus the day's most essential reads and interesting ideas. Sign Up »         Share Act Four:       Twitter      Facebook Trouble reading? Click here to view in your browser. You received this email because you signed up for Act Four. For additional free newsletters or to manage your newsletters, click here. We respect your privacy. If you believe that this email has been sent to you in error or you no longer wish to receive email from The Washington Post, click here. Contact us for help. ©2017 The Washington Post, 1301 K St NW, Washington DC 20071