Think about the greatest sitcoms in television history -- "Seinfeld", "Friends", "The Office", "Modern Family", etc. -- all of which consistently aired around 22 episodes per season. Compare that to a popular modern sitcom like "Adults", which has a mere 16 episodes between its first two seasons combined. These measly mini-seasons take away any chance for a new comedy to flourish, especially when the episodes are limited to a 22-minute runtime. Production studios may view this episode reduction as a means to limit production costs, but the creative cost is impossible to ignore. Shortened seasons force the writers to rush through storylines and take fewer creative risks, ultimately leaving audiences unsatisfied.
If a 22-episode show is airing weekly, viewers would be tuning in to watch for around 5 months. The audience has nearly half of a calendar year to really fall in love with the characters and the world they live in. On top of that, there are 22 weeks for new viewers to become invested in the sitcom, tell their friends, and begin watching together weekly. An 8-episode season simply doesn’t have the staying power and has far less opportunity to leave a cultural impact (especially if all episodes drop the same day).
Long-term airing schedules also allow sitcoms to adapt to their release date, most notably with holiday episodes. "The Office" had a Christmas-themed episode each season, which would not only feature some major laughs but some important character moments too. Modern sitcoms have no time to waste, and they certainly can’t fit in a holiday episode because they don’t have the luxury of doing so.
"Adults" absolutely took over the internet for the entirety of the second season with people constantly posting about how hilarious each episode was. Fans were shipping characters together, making montages of the show's most funny moments, and actively petitioning for a third season before the second one even concluded. Then, it ended and the online buzz began to just fizzle out. A lot of the hallmark sitcoms would not have ever grown to the heights of their success if they were stuck in a 2-month release window. That leaves viewers with 10 months out of the year to completely forget about the show. If fans wished to rewatch the show, they would be able to binge through an entire season in less than 3 hours.
Sitcoms have the unique privilege of becoming a comfortable, reliable source of comedy each week. If that source runs out after just 8 episodes, viewers tend to move on to the next thing.
The slow-burn romance is one of the most iconic tropes from any long-running sitcom. Whether it’s Ross & Rachel or Jim & Pam, these romances are so compelling because we watch as the characters fall in love over the course of several seasons. Every stolen glance, cute gesture, and lingering hug is a breadcrumb leading to their full-fledged relationship. These details are often emphasized by showing one of the romantic leads dating someone who is wrong for them. Several episodes can be spent on a toxic relationship, which lays the groundwork for who that character should truly end up with. All of these factors are only possible within a full-length season.
There is no time for a slow-burn when you have a full cast of characters to attend to each episode. In an 8-episode run, the little breadcrumbs must be replaced with glaringly obvious clues that two characters will get together because there isn’t time for a gradual buildup. One of my main criticisms of Season 2 of "Adults" is that the main couple felt as if they broke up out of nowhere. These characters didn’t even get a full scene to break up and explain their issues. The whole sequence felt rather lackluster, as if their relationship was more of a fling that we shouldn’t have rooted for in the first place. The time we spend with these characters adds so much weight to every single interaction they have. "Parks and Recreation" is an excellent example. April and Andy initially seemed like an odd pairing, and the showrunners didn’t even plan on putting them together. But after seeing their wonderful chemistry, the writers had the space to organically develop that connection.
There are some sitcoms that are much more episodic, without any overarching plots across seasons. These shows also suffer from a reduced number of episodes because it stifles creativity. "It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia" has recently switched to the 8-episode model, but it used to release as many as 15 episodes in a season. This allowed the writers to take some big swings with experimental episodes like "Being Frank," which is entirely shot from the perspective of Danny DeVito’s character. That sort of gag can only be done if the show has the proper space for it. Viewers tune into these sitcoms for a very specific dynamic, and when writers are limited to so few episodes, it can be intimidating to branch out from the typical formula. If sitcoms were able to return to their full 22-episode glory, they would have far more room to prosper creatively and tell more compelling stories.
Sitcoms are not getting worse. In fact, a whole new generation of comedic minds are writing, producing, and starring in a litany of new shows that are rousing successes. The reason so many of these shows seem to be cancelled prematurely is that they are not given the proper chance to thrive. How can a show be expected to cultivate a devoted fan base off of 3 cumulative hours of content? The sitcom is a staple genre of television, and these shows are fully capable of thriving in the streaming era — that is, if they are given the opportunity to reach their full potential with a full-length season.
