Laugh Tracks — The Inevitable Tool?

The joke rolls. Cue for the can of hysteria to open up. The audience obliges. This sequence repeats itself until the credits roll. And there- you now have an episode of a sitcom, or at least, around two-thirds of it. But the modern counterparts of sitcoms beg to differ…well, at least some of them do.

Before coming around to an opinion, let’s look at the history of laugh tracks, shall we?

It all started when Charley Douglass, a sound engineer at CBS decided to take offence on the inaccuracy at which the studio audience laughed, sometimes before the punchline (in anticipation) and sometimes after it had lost all it’s in-the-moment spice. Any delay, however minute it may be, derailed the narrative of a sitcom episode to quite an extent. Then there were other factors like the decibel level, length of the laughter…. they were just too noticeable to Douglas. He decided to let go of the rawness of the natural reaction of the audience and began to tamper with it, amping it up or down to the effects he desired.

Douglas’ work was first used on The Hank McCune Show, 1950 which would become the industry standard for years to come (laughs in (pun not intended) Friends, TBBT, Seinfeld to mention a few).

Friends is a show that’s been tied to people’s hearts for two decades now, well past its farewell episode (barring the reunion). Being like life support to some, especially during the pandemic, this has been a unique show which has seen fans cry and laugh at the same time. In other words, soldered to the very lives of the viewers. Featuring the journey of six friends traversing their lives through New York, this show has had its share of iconic moments which, suffice to say, will forever be etched in our hearts.

At the same time, it has been infamously regarded as the best example of a sitcom to use laugh tracks as a vicious tool to cover it’s sometimes over the top humour (treading on dangerous grounds here). Yes, Friends had live audiences instead of pre-recorded sounds but nevertheless, the argument stands. There have been quite a few compilations made by creators on YouTube on ‘Friends without laugh tracks’ which appeared to completely morph some of the shows’ characters from likeable to the polar opposite. To quote abc.net, on Ross, “everyone’s favourite triple-divorcee palaeontologist comes off like a psychopathic villain”. They further talk about how every character just seemed to be a soulless entity, just walking around throwing lines.

Thus aiming to prove that laugh tracks are instruments which, if exploited ferociously, can alter perception of a show’s quality immensely (even Big Bang Theory to a certain extent…. Yes, Leonard and Penny, I’m looking at you.).

But sitcoms have come a long way. From Seinfeld, the ’70s show to Office (US), Family Guy, Parks and Recreation and the highly regarded dark comedy BoJack Horseman. Let’s talk about one of the aforementioned shows.

The Office (US) was one of the first shows to wholly embrace the no laughter rule in the sitcom world and boy, do I thank the creators for doing so. It worked wonders. Being one of the first shows as bearers of that rule, it was an experiment at its very root. It was based on The Office (UK), a show unknown to many despite it being the essential kickstarter of the modern sitcom genre. Upon its arrival, people had their reservations. This was expected, since a sitcom was supposed to be flashy- characters throwing their hands around, moving their face muscles more than Emilia Clark’s moves her eyebrows. Some believed the monotonic 9–5 office life was very well portrayed by the show by the dryness and sadism, trademarks of British humour. According to them, that is what a show was supposed to do, instead of exhibiting unrealistic lifestyles, while some were of the opinion that the show shouldn’t have veered off the formula though which all the preceding sitcoms found success. They believed that the show should have used the insatiable lifeline of laugh tracks.

Then came Office (US), a trial show to see if the audience could appreciate the American adaptation of its unsuccessful UK counterpart. Whether the American slick, tongue-in-cheek humour could do justice to the legacy of its predecessor. Season 1 had a pretty dry run considering that they just wanted to try it out and had no definite script to work from. Then came Season 2, and there was a new sheriff in town. They modified Michael Scott’s character, the protagonist of the show, from being your typical shrewd, do-your-job-and -shut boss to being one of the most beloved bosses television has ever seen. They learnt from their mistakes (which is a very, very rare quality of a sitcom). The supporting characters showed so much depth, they could be spun into their own spinoff shows……all consistently till Season 9 (some would say 7). They avoided the use of laugh tracks, instead focusing on the strength of the story and side plots, all the while having a clear idea of what they really wanted the show to be.

While agreeing wholeheartedly that a sitcom is just a TV show and at the end of the day, is not supposed to be taken seriously, one can’t just help but frown when the characters just stare awkwardly at the table while waiting for the next catchphrase while the laugh track is being played in its lavish grandeur.

One can argue that laughter tracks were rightfully justified when they first came out- given that it was the wee years of television, aimed primarily at drawing in a large audience who weren’t quite familiar with the sophisticated aspects of comedy.

Is the comedic timing apt? Is the environment set for a quick joke? Is the quip insensitive to anyone? Keeping in mind these factors for 5+ seasons (typical for a sitcom) and churning out new pleasantries continuously, it may seem that using laugh tracks as an assist may not be that big of a cheat after all. But turns out, even in the mid-90s, a lot of celebrities had their reservations about this. In a 1955 interview, legendary actor and producer David Niven said “The laugh track is the single greatest affront to public intelligence I know”. In a Billboard magazine item in 1955, TV production chief Babe Ungar talked about how he himself hated canned laugh tracks but at the same time, was of the belief that ‘an audience reaction was necessary because TV viewers expect an audience to be there.’ This was quite understandable as before the popularity of television, people were used to live performances at theatres and cinemas. The transition would have been too harsh had laugh tracks not been there to appease the audience.

In my opinion, though, sitcoms don’t need those canned sounds anymore. Given that modern shows pose more like adaptations of real-life scenarios, rather than giving us the old assured doses of laughter in unideal settings, it simply seems unnecessary and irrelevant. It’s only a sign of an evolving audience which recognises the absurdity of artificial laughter and prefer real unassisted content. And of course……an improving audience inevitably leads to a better show. (Cries in typical Indian soap operas).

There you have it. Both sides of the coin (along with my hopefully humble opinion), all presented to you to decide.

Until next time,

Kohav Dey