‘Emmys Watch 2025’ showcases critical responses to the series nominated for Outstanding Drama, Outstanding Comedy, and Outstanding Limited Series at that 77th Primetime Emmy Awards. Contributions to this theme explore critical understandings of some series nominated in these categories.

To kick off our “Emmys Watch” series, Pop Junctions spotlights a podcast that goes deeper into impactful television content. The Peabody Awards continue to champion what they call “stories that matter”—narratives that don’t just entertain, but engage us as citizens. In this interview, Jeffrey Jones, Executive Director of the Peabody Awards and co-creator of the podcast We Disrupt This Broadcast, speaks with one of Pop Junctions’ associate editors, Lauren Alexandra Sowa, about how the podcast extends the Peabody Awards’ mission. 

We disrupt this broadcast logo

Lauren: I wanted to start off by saying thank you so much for joining me today and talking about your amazing podcast, We Disrupt This Broadcast. Can you talk a little bit about the genesis of the podcast, what inspired this idea, and how does it complement the mission of the Peabody Awards?

peabody awards logo

Jeffrey:  Yeah, so, a couple things. The Peabody Awards are located at the University of Georgia and, as an educational mission, we feel like we have more to do than just hand someone an award, pat them on the back, and say, “good job, put it on your Vita, see you next year.” Which is to say, everything that Peabody recognizes are what we call “stories that matter,” and we really mean that. Not so much “matter” to us as consumers, but “matters” to us as citizens. That mandate of a story that “matters” to us as citizens means that often the stuff we recognize may not be known by many people, including within the industry itself. We do entertainment, news, documentary, public service, children's, and podcasting. So, there's a lot of materials that aren't always well known. 

We disrupt this broadcast podcast logo

The second thing about this was this understanding that, since I joined Peabody in 2013, we’ve been living through what scholars call the streaming era. And the streaming era has been massively disruptive to the typical flow of events, and I don't need to articulate all that here. The system was created in a non-advertiser-centric programming flow, and did accentuate prestige programming. But, in that process, a lot of diverse and emerging voices were allowed to create programming: Mo (Netflix), Ramy (Hulu), We Are Lady Parts (Peacock), Pose (FX), Transparent (Amazon Prime), Reservation Dogs (FX), and, I could go on and on, but you get the point—the industry has opened up, allowing more really creative showrunners and storytellers and creatives to tell their stories, which used to be much more marginalized voices. 

So, the title is, We Disrupt This Broadcast, and it's so focused on disruption. It's focused on the text and the showrunners—the creatives who are producing these texts that we find disruptive to the industry. The focus is on entertainment television. Almost all have won a Peabody. It is one of the ways in which these kinds of stories are doing something a little different from the broadcast era of television.

Lauren: That's great! It's exciting to hear that you're talking about disruption on the content side of things, because I feel like, as you had mentioned earlier, that a lot of discourse surrounding “television disruption” centers the industrial impact side of things. Many of us are familiar with Amanda Lotz's book, We Now Disrupt This Broadcast, which traces that history. What differentiates your podcast and why I find it a compelling listen is how you're focusing more on what that content is, who the creators are, and what they're bringing to the cultural conversation.

Jeffrey: Exactly. It is disruption and a narrative and cultural flow. Peabody feels very good about the diverse and emerging voices. So, a lot of those people that I named—Mo, Ramy, We Are Lady Parts—there are three shows that have Muslim representation. All were very new showrunners when they won a Peabody Award. The same with Sterlin Harjo and Reservation Dogs. So, those are emerging voices, and they often come out of the gate really strong. They produce Peabody-winning shows, and we want to highlight that. 

The podcast is focused on two things: one is an interview with the showrunner and or major talent on the show—traditionally just getting into what they're doing and how and why. The second part of the podcast is strongly emphasized by our producing partners. So, our producing partner is the Center for Media and Social Impact at American University, headed by Caty Borum. In particular, it's an interview with an expert—an academic, a journalist, who can reflect on the kind of cultural, political, and economic dimensions of what makes this show or the showrunner relevant. So, it's grounding the popular, cultural text in the moment of the political, economic, and social context in which it exists.

Lauren: Oftentimes, I feel like we, as academics, try to find this balance between the celebratory part of media and being critical as well. So, would it be fair to say then that in this podcast, you are taking the content that we want to celebrate, and analyzing how it's being critical of culture or critical of these moments?

Jeffrey: Yeah, I think the second expert interview is the moment of more traditional critical analysis. And of course, we don't have a monopoly on that. There's plenty of authors. Though we interview lots of professors, they just aren't often media studies professors. One of the great things is we're often talking to psychologists, to economics professors, to sociologists and others. So, it broadens the conversation. I think the critical component is to reflect on how the text sits within culture, what it illuminates. I do think there's a celebratory part to the podcast. I mean, we're celebrating when we give them a Peabody Award, right? But the critical part of the analysis is that it's really hard to win a Peabody Award. You know, only about 7 to 10 shows win a Peabody in a given year. So, critically, we've cut out a lot that don't belong. And the ones that are there, we are celebrating. And again, I think for the right reasons, because they are doing something in the streaming era that wasn't on television when I was a kid. It didn't exist. Frankly, when you and I were growing up, it wasn't the same kind of text. For the industrial reasons of advertising and the kind of competition, monopoly of the three, four networks, etc. 

Lauren: I know that this year, Hacks is an example of a show that has both a Peabody Award and an Emmy nomination, but that kind of crossover doesn’t happen all that often. How do you see the Peabody Awards intersecting with the Emmys? Do you think the Peabody’s can help reach a broader audience? The Emmys often reflect the political canvassing of the Hollywood scene to win. While the Peabody’s seem to focus more on meaningful content without the campaigning. So, in a broader context, what does that say? And how do you think we can bridge the gap between the two to bring that kind of content to a wider audience?

Jeffrey: Yeah, well, I'd start with that, you know, most people don't realize our process. So, Peabody meets 3 times face-to-face. And it is an award that is decided across genres and platforms: television, radio, podcasting, and interactive, which is games and VR, etc. And across genre: entertainment, news, documentary, etc. But in particular, it's decided by a unanimous vote of a board of 18 people. And those 18 people represent lots of different facets. There's critics, which include academics and TV critics, media executives, writers, and showrunners. And I want to compare the face-to-face critical deliberation that we engage in as to who will be a winner is different from a campaign for 26,000 voting members, in which you have no control of what they've watched and what they've not watched. So, they're very different processes. You know, Aziz Ansari was famous for coming to our show and saying, “You know, this is pretty cool. It's like you watch all of our shit, and you just decided it was good, and we didn't have to go to a bunch of weird-ass parties and stuff, you know?”

Lauren: Ha! That’s great!

Jeffrey: So, by being different processes, they are different things. Ours is also not just about the craft: it is, is it a story that matters? So, sometimes the craft can be brilliant, but it may not be a story that matters.

But, back to your question about crossover: yeah, there are popular shows like Hacks (HBO Max), The Last of Us (HBO Max), The Bear (FX), Ted Lasso (Apple TV)—they win Peabody's, they win Emmys. But between the voting process, and really somewhat even the criteria of what we're looking for, that crossover can exist, but may not. And often, it probably doesn't. Peabody will often recognize shows truly on their merits, and not the political forces that shape multi-million-dollar campaigns by the industry players to influence votes.

Lauren: Absolutely. So, now, as someone who has studied and shaped media discourse, what has surprised you most in your conversations about the podcast, or something that was unexpected?

we disrupt this broadcast (season 2, feb 6, 2025) with Bill Lawrence and Brett Goldstein

Jeffrey: Not really. It's just a privilege to be able to talk to showrunners about their craft. It's a privilege to look for themes. I mean, I think we probably interview a little differently than journalists, probably because we're academics. We want to dig into the text a bit more than a traditional media trade publication, journalist interview. So, I think about my interview with Bill Lawrence and Brett Goldstein about Shrinking (Apple TV)  and Ted Lasso (Apple TV). You know, I'm a man of a certain age, and so is Bill, and I literally said it in that way, and he laughed, said, yes, we are. And we got to talk about toxic masculinity and therapy, and then with Shrinking, about forgiveness, and the textual themes that are percolating across both of those shows. So, in that regard, I feel not so much surprised as by what a privilege it is to hold that conversation.

Lauren: You had a successful two seasons of the podcast. Are there plans for season three as well? What do you see as the future for We Disrupt this Broadcast?

Jeffrey: There are indeed. We will launch Season 3 either later this year or early 2026. We're very happy. I should give a shout out to our producing partner, PRX (Public Radio Exchange), which produces a lot of quality podcasts. They reached out to us to produce this show, and we couldn't be happier. They're quality folks, and I'm very happy to still support public radio even through the PRX avenue.

Lauren: Well, I think that our audience, or our readers, would definitely enjoy listening to this podcast. I just started, too, and I think it's excellent. Gabe Gonzalez does a wonderful job with his interviews. One of the things that strikes me is that it is academic, but it is incredibly entertaining and very human. I think that's one of the best parts about listening to it, and I think that's what makes it engaging for people who study this and people who don't. I think it's accessible to everyone.

Jeffrey: One of the things that's great about our podcast, I think, and I'm a huge Gabe Gonzalez fan, is that he's a comedian, and extremely smart, and extremely talented.

Lauren: Agreed! Thank you again so much. Is there anything else you want to share or add that I didn't ask about that you would want everyone to know?

Jeffrey: That's a great one, always a great question. One of the things is that Peabody is a very respected award. It's existed for 85 years, it predates the Emmys, because we were recognizing radio broadcasting first. And there's still so much integrity to the award and love for the award in the industry. But the Peabody's, because of its position a little outside the industry, and at a university, there's a little bit of a moral imperative, if you will. It's not just the base to win a Peabody on popularity, but this is the way storytelling does something for us as citizens. So, I think one of the things that's great about the podcast is it's leaning into that. It's not just celebrating entertainment. It's trying to talk about the ways that popular culture and entertainment can deeply shape who we are and want to be as a people, as empathetic citizens in the world. And that's, of course, what Henry Jenkins' whole career has been built on, and why Henry identifies with Peabody and contributed to it for 6 years.

It's that kind of imperative, I think, that we believe, like Henry does, that entertainment can be a positive force, especially in an era when so much news media is seen as rejectable.

As a rejectable truth, as something that you’re buying a brand that's no different than the politics that you adhere to. But when you're telling stories that are deeply empathetic about people and the world that aren't like you, maybe there's an avenue for people to watch it as entertainment and see a part of the world, or even a part of themselves that they weren't in touch with, and that they'll give more credence to, and more love for, and more empathy for. And that's what popular entertainment can do. And to me, that's what the Peabody Awards lean into when we do entertainment programming, but it's especially what this podcast does.

Lauren: That's beautifully stated. I was going to say, that's why art and pop culture (it's all the same thing, right?) makes us human and, like you said, tells the stories about who we are as a people. It's why most of us study this, and why we dedicate our lives to it, right?

Jeffrey: Sure, absolutely, for sure. For sure.

Lauren: That's great. Well, thank you again so much, Jeff. I really appreciate it. This was a really fun, very informative conversation.

Biographies

Jeffrey P. Jones is the Executive Director of the George Foster Peabody Awards at the University of Georgia and Lambdin Kay Chair for the Peabodys in the Department of Entertainment & Media Studies. Jones became only the fifth director of the Peabody Awards in 2013. He holds a Ph.D. in Radio-TV-Film from The University of Texas at Austin. In conjunction with the Center for Media & Social Impact at American University and produced by PRX, Peabody launched a podcast in 2023—WE DISRUPT THIS BROADCAST—celebrating entertainment winners through the lens of cultural and industrial disruption in the streaming era. Professor Jones is the author and editor of six books, including Entertaining Politics: Satiric Television and Civic Engagement, Satire TV: Politics and Comedy in the Post-Network Era, and The Essential HBO Reader.  His research and teaching focuses on popular politics, or the ways in which politics are engaged through popular culture.

Lauren Alexandra Sowa is a Visiting Assistant Professor of Communication at Pepperdine University. She received her Ph.D. from the Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism at the University of Southern California and has a BFA in Acting from NYU's Tisch School of the Arts. Her research focuses on intersectional feminism and representation within production cultures, television, and popular culture and has been published in The International Journal of Communication and Communication, Culture and Critique. These interests stem from her several-decade career in the entertainment industry as member of SAG/AFTRA and AEA. Lauren is a proud "Disney Adult" and enthusiast of many fandoms. Lauren is also a Pop Junctions associate editor.