The Phenomenon that is Reality Television

OK, here is my turn at starting a thread...I am not an artsy person, but I think that this warrants discussion...

Personally, I dont get 'reality' TV. TV producers pick people that are anything but your Average Joe, take them out of their home, out of their comfort zones, and plop them in some strange situation, and voila, we have a reality TV show.

The shows are nothing like reality. I, for one, have never been stranded on a tropical island, or in the middle of a desert. I have never been to a holiday resort where the only objective is to try and get my girlfriend and I to cheat on each other. Nor have I ever spent up to 3 months isolated with a few strangers, and no outside stimulation.

These shows are nothing like reality, yet people lap them up.

So what is it about these strange and unusual shows that makes them become such huge successes?
Is it the voyeur factor? The idea that we can spy on these people?
Is it the fact that we enjoy seeing people being tortured, put in horrible situations?

Anyone care to explain?

 

In a way, it is voyeurism, and yet people do fall over themselves to watch it, and even be on it, no matter what fools they might make of themselves in the process. Just look at the Jerry Springer show.

It is cheap, mindless entertainment, but on commercial TV, it becomes common programming, because it is cheap and popular. Personally, I can't see the appeal of watching someone chasing their 15 minutes of fame standing in front of a mirror shaving (if I want to see that, I can just look in the mirror every morning), but maybe that's just me.

 

I also don't understand the appeal of "reality" television. Shows like Jerry Springer and Fear Factor only show the lowest, most disgusting parts of what can be considered reality. But people eat this trash up, ignoring true, quality reality television like what we see in the Discovery Channel and its sister networks. I sincerely hope that the next wave of these shows flops, so that we can kiss this disturbing fad goodbye.

 

Reality shows could only be considered "real" if every man, woman, and child on the face of the planet had a video camera following them around on a daily basis. The network execs who come up with these shows ought to be ashamed with themselves. Sadly though, we are an incredibly voyeuristic society. As long as people continue to watch this tripe, the networks will keep pumping it out.

And while it's a bit of a tangental subject, I'm also sick of the influx of game shows in the last year. Since the premier of Who Wants to be a Millionaire, everybody and their brother is trying to cash in on this fad. And for some reason, they all seem to think that a show with a really high stress level is what we want. Well, it's not. Shows like The Chair (and whatever Fox's clone of it was) flopped after a scant two airings. And thank God The Weakest Link was cancelled. What does that say about our society, when we scramble to participate in a game show where the host continually insults us? It's a sad state of affairs. At least there's still Jeopardy, a game show that actually requires its contestants to use their brains, and not to "phone a friend" for the answer.

 

I have never seen the appeal behind reality shows (though I did enjoy Boot Camp) and SpyTV makes me physically ill. Is this what our country's coming to that we are forced to degrade people in public like that? I don't care if it's staged or not, it tells us something about our society. Voyerism probably plays a big part of reality TV, but I think it might have more to do with the inbred "knowledge" that life is better for everyone else. We put other people, people we don't know and so we may think that their lives are perfect, in situations where all their natural and social protection is gone. We film them 24/7. We find their flaws, and we feel vindicated in our human-ness and we feel superior.

 

A quote that sums up Liz's comments:

Troy McClure: Here's an appealing fellow. In fact, they're a-peeling him off the sidewalk!
Homer Simpson: Heh heh. It's funny 'cause I don't know him!

 

Well, for the most part I don't like these Reality Shows, but I have to admit, I like Fear Factor. For a couple of reasons. One, Joe Rogan is funny as hell. Two, its interesting to watch and see what people will do and what they will put themselves through for money. There is something alluring about watching a guy pig rectums just so he can get a chance at fifty thousand. I guess that's something that's true of just about all the shows. Its got that car wreck fascination. Its horrible, its disgusting, but for the life of me, I can't turn away.

 

Uhhh, ok...I've never heard of Fear Factor. You might have to explain it to me...judging by the mention of pig rectum, it doesnt sound like your typical show...

Oh, and is there anyone here that likes these shows? I mean, they are successful...surely someone here will stick up for them?

 

//shrug

we're all geeks here. Do you think these shows are targeted at a different audience? hmm...maybe they should make an Internet Survivor game: whoever can stay the longest on a given message board without falling asleep or dying from boredom or frustration wins a million dollars. It'd be the ultimate pyscological test.


fear factor is that they take about 15 people (???) and make them do stunts and do gross things for money. kinda live survivor without an island.

 

Fear Factor: Actually its 6 people, 3 guys, 3 girls. They complete in three different stunt type things. The first is always a physical thing, jumping from a platform and grabbing onto a net about fifty up in tha air, jumping from one moving boat to another. Something like that. The second is always something gross, either eating something gross, or having them put on you. I've seen them eat pig rectums, they've been strapped into a tub and had 50 snakes put in with them, things like that. The final is always a physical feat, more challenging then the first. If you fail the "stunt" or if you're too scared to try it, you're elminated. The last person standing gets 50,000.

Like I said, its actually kind of interesting to see what people will endure for a chance at the money. People deathly afraid of spiders will put their head in a box with 25 of them crawling around. And Joe Rogan, (A comedian) is funny as hell on the show. He takes nothing seriously. He isn't living under the impression that he's making quality TV, he's just out having fun.

 

I would argue that if a person knows they are being filmed certain barriers and "characters" appear making "reality TV" nothing of the sort.

 

You know I was really into Survivor 1 and 2 and a few other eality shows and then the conept just got old. I don't know, the idea of reality television isn't all that great when after four seasons of survivor you realise how much stuff must be fixed

*cough* four winners, four minority's *cough*

Darth_Tyrannous The canadian signature and Sacramento Kings signature, still the #1 team in my mind

 

I don't watch all reality television, but I couldn't live without Survivor. To me, it's partially what DDH said - the fascination of what people will put themselves through for money. Also, it's a good piece of the human dynamic rolled up into an hour long package. It's beyond interesting to me to see all of the different personality types in America clash with each other.

EDIT: I don't see how people can claim that the game is fixed. Mark Burnett (Survivor's head honcho) tried to alter one player's strategy in the original Survivor, and look what it got him - a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Can he place certain challenges here or there to benefit certain contestants? Sure. But the fact remains that Burnett's favorites from each season (Ramona, Jeff, Frank, Gina) have never even come CLOSE to winning.

EDIT 2: Besides, only one of Survivor's winners was ACTUALLY a minority. Richard Hatch, the winner of Survivor I, was a 39 year old male WASP. He just so happened to be homosexual. That doesn't make him a minorty. Survivor II's winner, Tina Wesson, was a 40 year old female WASP. Again, not a minority. Survivor III's winner, Ethan Zohn, was a 26 year old white male who happened to be Jewish. Only Survivor IV's winner, Vecepia Towery, a 37 year old black woman, is TRULY a minority.

 

Im a huge Big Brother fan

 

"Im a huge Big Brother fan"

I also enjoy Big Brother, yet I don't think I could possibly explain why. And I think that's one of the biggest appeals of reality television. It's different, or at least it was for a little while, until everyone and their mother started developing reality shows. But I find things like Big Brother to be mindless entertainment and I can't help but watch. It's not reality in the sense that I am a real person typing at my computer. It's reality in that, like real life, it is unscripted. Whether that makes it more entertaining or not, I don't know. But it's different.

Amazing.

 

The only reality show I enjoy is The Mole. Anyone else watch this one? It's wonderful, because it adds a ton of depth to the game in addition to the 'cast-away' aspect from other reality shows. Trying to find out who the Mole is is a challenge...and the games vary from intelligence trials to physical endurance tests to humorous quirks. And the best part - there's a twist in every episode!

Anyone else like The Mole?

 

Don't get me wrong Jeffro, I love the show. But at the beggining of Marquesas, my friend said that Sean or Vecepia would win because they are african american and that would pretty much complete the minority thing. I disagree, I think all the winners have belonged to some sort of minority, Yet, your point is valid that if it was fixed, his favorites would have won and, never did.

P.S: Damn I wanted Greg to win in survivor 1 and Jeff in survivor 2.

Darth_Tyrannous The canadian signature and Sacramento Kings signature, still the #1 team in my mind

 

Voyuerism is definitely a part of it. But it's not just the "I get a rush from observing people's lives" voyuerism. A lot of people just watch for the skin. This is sound marketting, and makes good money, but it isn't reality. True reality television can only come about from hidden cameras, and the like. What scares me is that a lot of people would enjoy that. When it's a bunch of attractive young people, with a few token whatevers thrown in, all placed in Africa, or on an island, or in Australia or whatever, that is so far divorced from reality as to be comical when called it. However, it's also not true voyuerism to watch it. However real the human interactions are, the scenarios are a lot closer to to sitcoms than to reality.

 

I simply can't understand what people see in Big Brother. It can't be simple voyeurism as tv watchdogs aren't going to allow anything too salacious to slip through. I watched it once, purely in the interests of research, to see if I was missing something and if I could get a handle on it's popularity, but far from enlightening me, it only made me more puzzled than ever as to why anyone would watch such turgid rubbish.
Why spend time watching lots of total strangers sitting in a house doing absolutely nothing. It's like a quiz show without any questions. Lots of attention junkies desperate to appear on tv and hopefully win some cash along with their fifteen minutes of fame. Like the tv critic Victor Lewis-Smith says if these talentless individuals are so desperate to see themselves on camera, why not go along to their local tv/video retailer and watch themselves on the CCTV.

 

I really don't see anything remotely entertaining about Big Brother. Although, I'd say that reality shows like BB and the Real World are probably the closest to 'reality' (as compared to Survivor, the Mole, etc.), I really don't have as much interest in them.

This leads me to believe that, in fact, 'pure' reality is not as entertaining. Shows like the Amazing Race, and especially, the Mole, are most entertaining IMO. And the 'reality' factor is probably not the reason why. The tight situations, exotic locales, and overal 'fun' factor are what makes me enjoy those shows. Although, it may be true that these things are better achieved through a 'real' cast, as opposed to paid actors.