I would like to address the first point.
To not make the simplified statement of “these posts are based on my opinion.” Which to put it simply, they are just that. I would like to touch upon this concept a bit prior to my future (heavily procrastinated) posts. The analysis I present is based on my subjective method of analysis. It is more important that I present the details of a conclusion and create a method of reasoning for how I came to the conclusion I am arguing than to just make unjustified claims from any perspective. I will present my argument and explain how I came to this conclusion by discussion of my evidence (sounds like the common method of approach).
It is important to state this because the points that are made in a post are intended to be refuted with another’s subjective analysis. If there is a method of reasoning that can be discussed it not only helps both the poster (me) and the audience (you) to advance their knowledge of this particular topic but also allows the understanding that an opinion is formed with some sort of basis in mind. I or others may not agree but for everyone involved seeing multiple different engagements is beneficial. A claim without the follow up of any reasoning, rationalization, or evidence cannot do any justice to an argument nor can simply brushing off anyone’s opinion as “an opinion.”
Example of engagement I would personally hope for.
Person A (me): Claim about show. I think this because point A,B, and C.
Person B (audience member): I disagree with this point because A is not viable evidence because of reason X & Y.
Person A: Route 1- I agree, I will reconsider my claim. Route 2- I disagree because of either new presented evidence(D) and/ or reinforcement of evidence A. Route 3- Yes that is a very good point but I do not think it changes my claim for reason F & Z. Route 4- Do not address response.
Person B: Acknowledges counter points and either refutes or agrees to disagree. Both parties will have presented their evidence and learned about a new perspective and may have even agreed in the end. Others may now view this presented evidence and add or form their own conclusions based on the evidence.
Obviously this is not the only way of approaching the issue but the main point is that dropping a claim or brushing off a claim as “just and opinion” does not really help anyone get a good understanding of what is being said and simply just causes unjustified disagreements that are based on lack of understanding of each other’s position.
Engagement in these ideas can be a fun and useful way to enjoy analysis of media as well as being ultimately useful for advancing the topic as a whole.
Objectivity is not the goal for in this type of thing it can most likely not be achieved (at least to my knowledge but that would make this a subjective statement so thats a contradiction right there). Changing others opinion is not the goal. The goal is to discuss subjective methods of analysis that can allow for intellectual engagement of media (of course media of the more nerdy type) as a topic.