(apologies for cross-posting) Liveness Oft described has ³being there as it happens² and considered to be the aesthetic mode of television, liveness has been advanced as that which distinguishes television from film. For technological reasons, early television broadcasts were live, and much of television program demonstrates this pedigree. Thus liveness seems essential to genres such as the sitcom, broadcast news, talk shows, sports telecasts and, more recently, the ³reality² show. Nevertheless, scholarship on liveness has generally emphasized the catastrophe and the disaster, in which the extraordinary quality of the event is leveraged so that temporal immediacy can more easily overcome spatial distance. This panel seeks papers addressing the question of liveness today. In light of recent digital technologies (e.g. DVRs) and new media (such as YouTube), is liveness still relevant to televisionıs viewers, programmers, and/or technological apparatus? What is the status of liveness in television studies? Have film and television converged so that liveness is no longer a mark of distinction? Case studies on particular events, programs, genres, and/or technologies are welcome, as are theoretical discussion of liveness and its epistemological, ontological and ideological implications. Deadline August 15. Send proposals to Stephen Groening ([log in to unmask]). ---- For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html