This paper uses the series Vicious (2013–2016), which aired on the British network ITV and the American noncommercial network PBS, as a case study in transatlantic reception for LGBTQ content. I draw on critical reception for the series, the star personae of lead actors Derek Jacobi and Ian McKellen, and studies of American perceptions of British masculinities. The varied reception for the series, understood through the networks’ economic models and cultural constructions of masculinities, reveals how notions of “quality” and “social progress” change as canned television travels to different national contexts.

Additional Metadata
Keywords gender/sexuality studies, global television, transatlantic, Vicious, sitcom, PBS, gender, LGBTQ
Publisher Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision
Persistent URL dx.doi.org/10.18146/view.218
Journal VIEW Journal
Rights Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Note VIEW Journal of European Television History and Culture; Vol 9, No 17 (2020); 134 - 145
Citation
Kies, Bridget. (2020). A Vicious Viewership: Transatlantic Television Audiences and LGBTQ Identities. VIEW Journal, 9(17), 134–145. doi:10.18146/view.218