this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2026
32 points (94.4% liked)

No Stupid Questions

48799 readers
294 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I was watching some and it was all just cringe and laugh tracks.

all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago

The majority of sitcoms are terrible. When you think of good older ones and compare them to bad ones today you're doing the thing.

[–] Steve@communick.news 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's a kind of nostalgic survivorship bias.
You remember the dozen or so old ones that were good, and forget the hundreds that were not.

[–] TipRing@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

You can even watch some of the ones you fondly remember to understand why they aren't classics.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 4 points 1 week ago

There are even ones that were popular back then which fell into a memory hole, like the 90's Brady Bunch reimagining.

[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Mostly, yeah, but then again genuinely funny ones were always rare.

Worse (in terms of sitcoms as a genre) they almost never stand up to time. And that's where some of the older ones have an advantage. Survivor bias. The shitty ones aren't in syndication any more. So we only see maybe the top ten percent of all of them with any regularity.

But it is damn hard to come up with the right combo of writers, cast, and zeitgeist. Look at the Dick van Dyke show as an example. Some of the best comedic actors in the business all in one place, with the best writers or the era, making a show that is about a situation that's damn near immortal because it focused on core segments of life. Because of that, even the less acceptable humor (and it never went bad) is easy to shrug off.

Since the executives in charge production are a product of decades of cynicism and money only thinking (it was almost always money first, but that is different), they take no risks, and want mostly reheated dreck. That's never a good foundation for comedy. It has to happen by accident when that constrained.

That being said, it does happen from time to time. While I'm not a sitcom fan, and not into it, always sunny manages to work for most people because they're willing to keep riding absurdity so that they don't need a real sense of continuity. There was the office (which, again, isn't my thing) that was one of those perfect storms of on-screen and off talent being allowed to go ham in a situation that is damn near universal in scope for its target area. Even if you haven't been stuck in an office, you likely know someone that has. It makes the jokes hit better, and the ones that don't can get carried by the cast's talent.

But, yeah, I don't think the current era is good for sitcoms. The old networks are running scared and chasing an old paradigm. The steamers are past the point of throwing money and seeing what sticks. The audience is spread out even more than the cable dominated era. It's hard to justify a non proven formula, and formulas don't work as well as they used to

[–] schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

One problem everyone is facing--from music to TV to movies to books to videogames--is people have accessto the full history of awesome media. Who is going to watch a new TV show these days when they could be watching The Wire, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, ALF, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, etc. for the first time?

I'd say it's here that sitcoms have a real chance to shine, because, as you've said, most sitcoms (the aforementioned ALF being a notable example) have not aged well and even an ephemeral modern sitcom can compete in that space.

[–] showmeyourkizinti@startrek.website 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

they could be watching The Wire, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, ALF, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, etc.

[–] schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

True. Mad Men is not centered around physical violence.

[–] Apepollo11@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Survivor bias is definitely a major factor here - I can vaguely remember at least a dozen sitcoms from my childhood and early adulthood that didn't survive (or got soft-rebooted into something better).

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

On TV? People still watch TV?

[–] starlinguk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Watching stuff on YouTube (or Nebula or whatever) is still TV.

[–] forgetfulmeat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Yeah this is how I see it too. When I say televised I usually mean commercially provided.

[–] imsufferableninja@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Watch an old sitcom without the laugh track. It's all just cringe.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Malcom in the middle doesn't have a laugh track and it is gold. You can have a good sitcom with and without a laugh track. And with a studio audience. But The Big Bang Theory without the track, oh god that was terrible.

[–] Pieisawesome@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

With the laugh track it was still horrible

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Which one? You are completely nuts if you think the original Malcolm In The Middle was bad. Now, The Big Bang Theory, I totally agree was awful, to me.

[–] Pieisawesome@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I meant big bang theory, as Malcolm in the middle does not have one

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yes, you are right, I misread. It is my alcohol time, lol.

[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Of course - a sitcom intended to have a laugh track, and edited that way, is always going to sound totally wrong when that element is taken out.

The presence of a laugh track in the original show doesn't automatically make it bad though. Many genuinely great comedies have had a laugh track included.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Some have actual studio audiences. Like IT crowd.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think you're ignoring the core point of the above comment, which is that the long pauses in the show for the laughs are a planned part of the show. If you've never been to a recording, the audience noises aren't spontaneous. There are signs telling the audience when to make noise.

Live audiences sound better than canned laughs, but in terms of pacing for a sitcom, it's the same thing.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

They had to tell the audience in Seinfeld to stop cheering for Kramer. And Seinfeld is still gold, baby!!!!!!

[–] aaaa@piefed.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So did The Big Bang Theory

The audience laughing wasn't the problem with that show

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Yea, they still added laugh tracks digitally, and also cue cards to laugh, as well as have a certain reaction. Yikes...

[–] MrQuallzin@pie.eyeofthestorm.place 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The history of the laugh track is pretty interesting

Who Killed the Laugh Track?

[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

That was interesting, thanks for the link 👍

[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The presence of a laugh track is irrelevant. The necessity of one for people to find the show funny is a different matter.

[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Agreed - but with the caveat that examples where there was one, but it was later removed, don't really count, because the way it's done screws up the timing.

To judge them fairly you'd have to somehow see what the same show was like if intentionally made without laughter from the start. Some might pass, others wouldn't.

[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think there are two kinds of new sitcom episodes airing today:

  • The ones on 'over the air' network, which are largely unfunny and cringey and have horrible laugh tracks.
  • The ones on smaller 'cable' networks that are more edgy and usually don't have laugh tracks, and which are usually genuinely funny.

For me the sitcoms of old were mostly the unfunny, cringey, laugh-track plagued ones. So I don't think the need cringey ones are really any worse than most of the older ones.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You are also forgetting about ones with the in studio audiences that were genuinely laughing.

[–] Klanky@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 week ago

I think there has always been funny and unfunny shows, just like there has always been music you will like and music you won’t like. Sometimes your sensibilities line up with cultural zeitgeist and other times you have to dig a little harder to find it. 🤷‍♂️ Don’t be that boomer being like ‘back in my day we had REAL music/comedy/whatever’

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Little has changed really, I find most sitcoms are just "meh", kind of like they've always been.

I know of 3 sitcoms that are genuinely laugh-out-loud funny, and the most recent one has been off-air for 10 years ("Still Game", Scottish sitcom). The others are "'Allo!, 'Allo!" from 1982 and "Corner Gas" from the early 2000's.

New stuff I'm watching today isn't sitcom, because sitcoms are such a crap shoot and any teasers I've seen look awful.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Corner Gas is aggressively mediocre.

Not even a sitcom fan, but could probably name a dozen that are funnier.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago

I think its good but its not what I would call laugh out loud. I view it as closer to british comedy.

[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago

Nah, there's some amazing sitcoms right now:

  • Workin' Moms

  • Shrinking

  • Platonic

Remember Sturgeon's Law.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 points 1 week ago

I'm not even sure what sitcoms exist today that aren't animated.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago

I have been watching some real old stuff. barney miller and mash hold up very well. Like you go into the eighties and with different strokes and the facts of life and ugh. I can't think of anything decent until like cheers. maybe we are going through a period like that.

[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 week ago

This isn't new.

I stopped watching TV in the mid-90s when Star Trek TNG turned out to be a disaster, and there was nothing else good on.

Most of the shows from that era (Seinfeld, Married with Children, Malcolm in the Middle), are about horrible people being horrible to each other - with a laugh track! - or about unrealistic people behaving in ridiculous ways (Friends, I'm looking at you!).

Sitcoms are rarely funny, but that's a long-standing tradition. Shitty and/or cringe-inducing behaviour rule the time slots.