- How real is reality television?
The diversity that exists within the broad category of reality television, along with the significant diversity that can occur between individual texts that exist within the same sub-genre means it is fundamentally impossible to make a categorical claim regarding how ‘real’ reality television is. That being said, what can be discussed is the capacity of reality television to utilize artifice or manipulate the narrative in the process depicting real life events – how unreal reality television has the capacity to be in the right hands. As highlighted by Kilborn (1994), the primary motivation of most forms of television is to some degree to entertain the audience due to the financial incentives of high audience engagement. Even when a program or media organisation’s main goal is to inform, there are often ideological leanings they desire to transfer to the audience, derived either from a sense of genuine ethical concern or because these ideologies may benefit the owners of these organisations either politically or financially. This can be seen especially clearly in US news organisations, which are often funded by financial elites who desire to propagate political leanings which most benefit them (Vinton, 2016). Even these less directly entertainment based mediums often have a flair for the dramatic in order to ensure prolonged engagement. Between the need to elevate drama and sneak in ideology, reality television has developed a significant number of techniques which manipulate reality while maintaining the facade of authenticity.
One of the most prominent techniques utilized to construct drama, especially in game shows, but not exclusive to the genre alone, is how information is edited to construct a certain narrative. How scenes within a reality show are cut together as well as the superfluous layers added such as music and sound effects can completely alter the meaning of recorded scenes. Without the need to use a script, reality television shows can manufacture drama by cutting together dialogue and interactions which occurred in a different order or completely separately, while adding specific music to elevate the desired tone of the artificial moment (Walters, 2016). This technique is present beyond genres usually considered entertainment for ‘the lowest common denominator’. Nature documentaries often splice shots from various days of shooting together, with said shots sometimes being of completely different individuals of the same species. Along with the use of selective establishing shots and music among other editing techniques, such texts can construct a dramatic narrative viewers are more likely to engage and empathise with (Nguyen, 2017).
In a similar vein, how events are framed by context and additional information can be used to completely alter the audience’s reading of events or information. This technique is often exceedingly common in more biased news/infotainment organisations, where key pieces of information are excluded in order to craft a narrative which consists of half-truths. This occurs in more traditional forms of reality television as well. True crime producers are known to omit details on explored cases, and emphasise others in order to fit within the given dramatic narrative the producer is attempting to create through these real events (Leszkiewicz, 2016).
Additionally, two potentially manipulative techniques emphasised by Kilborn (1994) are the use of the reality television host and dramatic recreations of events. Hosts or narrators in reality television, fairly straightforwardly, provide additional layers of meaning to clips presented in the shows they host via voiceover and discussion. These added layers vary from merely implying a recommended audience response to explicit value judgements which are meant to more overtly direct the audience towards a specific response to the filmed scenes the commentator’s statements are connected to. These commentators can completely alter the tone and textual comprehension of the audience. Potentially more manipulative are dramatic re-enactments which are most frequent in docudramas and increasingly, news reports. These re-enactments are at face value used to fill gaps in the depiction of real narratives that occurred via artificially reconstructing them. Kilborn suggests that this technique can be used to smuggle in both drama and ideology. By emphasising specific senses, events and actors within these recreations, creators can evoke in the audience a different understanding of how certain events transpired compared to the realities of these situations. This can be used to intentionally elevate the dramatic or develop an account of events contradictory to dominant narratives. Both of these techniques have the potential to manipulate seemingly real events to the creators benefit.
While claims still cannot be made on how real reality television as a whole, looking at these prevalent techniques which are often used to obscure reality and construct fantasy in the guise of reality, we can make a fairly confident claim on reality television‘s capability to be false. When considering both the vast toolset reality television can use to potentially mislead, and the major financial incentives of dramatization and prolonged engagement, it becomes abundantly clear that most reality television texts manipulate us to some extent. The extent to which this manipulation occurs depends on both the nature of the text and our subjective understandings of what can be considered real, however what is made abundantly clear in this era of disinformation and rapid technological advancement is the desperate need for audiences to develop a critical toolset which can combat the more egregious instances of reality manipulation.
Kilborn, R. (1994). ‘How real can you get?’: Recent developments in ‘reality’ television. European Journal of Communication, 9(4), 421-439. DOI: 10.1177/0267323194009004003
Vinton, K. (2016). These 15 Billionaires Own America’s News Media Companies. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/katevinton/2016/06/01/these-15-billionaires-own-americas-news-media-companies/?sh=797dbd4d660a
Walters, L. (2016). Lights, camera and a whole lot of editing – making a reality TELEVISION villain. Stuff. https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/television-radio/78140771/lights-camera-and-a-whole-lot-of-editing–making-a-reality-television-villain
Nguyen, H. (2017). How ‘Planet Earth II’ and Other Nature Docs Manipulate Footage to Mess With Our Emotions. Indiewire. https://www.indiewire.com/2017/04/nature-documentaries-fake-manipulated-video-1201809008/
Leszkiewicz, A. (2016). From Serial to Making a Murderer: can true crime as entertainment ever be ethical?. New Statesman. https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/television-radio/2016/01/serial-making-murderer-can-true-crime-entertainment-ever-be-ethical
Pop Genres 2020 