The Public Servant and the Auteur: A Comparative Analysis of Julie Andem’s and Sam Levinson’s Showrunning Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article compares the production/showrunner practices and representation of two of the most successful teen television series of the 2010s, Skam (NRK, 2015–2017) and Euphoria (HBO, 2019–) . It compares the collaborative public service production practice under Julie Andem’s Skam with the perpetuation of the singular male auteur through Sam Levinson’s authorial control in HBO’s “prestige” teen series Euphoria . We argue that Andem’s and Levinson’s showrunning approaches create two very different representations of growing up. Andem’s mission allows us to view her as a civil servant for social media meets public service teen programming, whereas Levinson’s film background and personal struggles with addiction dominate popular Euphoria discourse. Andem incorporates intermediality as an ethnographic means to connect to youth audiences’ tangible issues through research and social media intimacies, whereas Levinson adapts a cinematic intertextual approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".