The author begins by laying out the terms that distinguish film from TV, focusing on their cellular structures and editing possiblities, and then goes on to consider a comparison of "video" and "TV." The use of video in art, the author contends, is in no way superior to broadcast TV in intention or achievement, particularly because no video artist has engaged with the medium adequately. In attempting to define a TV aesthetic, the author points to TV's dependence on verbal communication over visual and the scale of the TV screen which approximates magazine and newspaper illustration. Thus, the spatial factors governing film editing do not translate to TV, which responds to verbal and narrative demands.