AbstractThe advent of subscriber-funded, direct-to-consumer, streaming video services has important implications for video distribution around the globe. Conversations about transnational media flows and power—a core concern of critical communication studies—have only just begun to explore these changes. This article investigates how global streamers challenge existing communication and media theory about transnational video and its cultural power and considers the theory rebuilding necessitated by streamers’ discrepant features. It takes particular focus on Netflix and uses the library data available from Ampere Analysis to empirically explore and compare 17 national libraries. Analyses suggest considerable variation in the contents of Netflix libraries cross-nationally, in contrast with other U.S.-based services, as well as Netflix libraries offering content produced in a greater range of countries. These and other results illustrate, albeit indirectly, the operations and strategies of global streamers, which then inform theory building regarding their cultural role.

The 2000 presidential election found the major party presidential candidates chatting with Oprah Winfrey, Rosie O'Donnell, and Regis Philbin, trading one‐liners with Jay Leno and David Letterman, and discussing rap music on MTV. This study investigates the impact of entertainment‐oriented talk show interviews of presidential candidates, using the 2000 election as a case study. I consider why such shows cover presidential politics, why candidates choose to appear on them, and who is likely to be watching. This discussion yields a series of hypotheses concerning the effects of these interviews on public attitudes and voting behavior. I test my hypotheses through a content analysis of campaign coverage by entertainment‐oriented talk shows, traditional political interview shows, and national news campaign coverage, as well as through a series of statistical investigations. I find that politically unengaged voters who watch entertainment‐oriented TV talk shows are more likely to find the opposition party candidate likeable, as well as to cross party lines and vote for him, relative to their counterparts who are more politically aware or who do not watch such shows.

Abstract The goal of this paper is to establish a cross-linguistic comparison between Peninsular Spanish and American English verbal humour as displayed in televised humorous monologues in late-night talk shows. While humour research is abundant across different languages, only a small number of studies investigating cross-cultural differences in verbal humour exist. An analysis of verbal humour in monologues from four current late-night TV talk shows in Spain and the United States revealed similar use of linguistic resources such as analogies, colloquialisms, cultural references to deliver humour but with different degrees of preference. Additionally, English monologues were mostly on political satire, while Spanish humour referenced a wider variety of topics including taboo-like themes and language such as sex, drugs, or religion. Spanish monologues were also more conversational and informal in their delivery.