Television's an intimate medium. It's in our living rooms. It's in our bathrooms. It's in our bedrooms - and we respect that.
Each medium has its own beauty and way of working. While television offers immense reach and long-running shows, films are shorter and they are presented differently. With theatre, it's the thrill of instant feedback.
Film in many ways is very literal.
The difference between the arts arises because of the difference in the nature of the mediums of expression and the emphasis induced by the nature of each medium. Each means of expression has its own order of being, its own units.
I see TV as a picture medium rather than a narrative medium.
We know from research that the reading circuit is not given to human beings through a genetic blueprint like vision or language; it needs an environment to develop. Further, it will adapt to that environment's requirements - from different writing systems to the characteristics of whatever medium is used.
Movies always had a captive audience, so they were able to do deeper, more complex things. Television was always about, 'Look at me now! Look at me now! Now go away!' That's starting to change.
The fact that radio is so hopeless at delivering data makes it an uncluttered medium, offering the basic story without the detailed trappings. But it does mean that if data is important, radio is probably not your place.
I think it distinguishes television from every other medium. It's what makes it kind of radical, and risky, and fun.
