Category: Week 11 Questions – Reality TV

1. 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

1. How real is reality TV?

According to Hill (2005), reality TV is categorized as popular factual programming and includes various themes, styles and techniques such as “non-professional actors, unscripted dialogue, surveillance footage, hand-held cameras [and] seeing events unfold as they are happening in front of the camera” (Hill, A., 2005). Kilborn (1994) states that one of the founding principles and objectives of reality TV, or RTV, is to provide their viewers with an “unmediated view of reality”.

So, how real is reality TV? Kilborn (1994) argues that viewers of RTV have grown to understand the inner workings of RTV and are aware that what they are watching on screen is in fact a “constructed reality” and that not everything presented to the audience is what it might seem. The primary objective of RTV is to entertain, in order to do so RTV producers make use of “necessary manipulation” through the use of various production techniques. Allen and Mendick (2013) discuss the representations of authenticity within RTV through three common themes: identification, such as beautiful people vs. people like me, situation, common goals vs. uncommon surroundings, and production, the unscripted vs. necessary manipulation.

Beautiful people can be classified as guests that fit societies views of the ideal person, while people like me introduces guests that are considered “ordinary”, this allows RTV to relate to their audiences while providing ideal aesthetics (Allen, K., & Mendick, H., 2013). While situations focus primarily upon cooperative psychology and location and setting, whereas unscripted are interactions, situations or consequences which arise from unknown or unpredictable variables and necessary manipulation are actions of the host or production to dramatize and exaggerate interactions between guests, alternatively for shows like Survivor, where guests are placed within highly competitive situations that challenge their physical skills as well as their intellectual and mental abilities (Kilborn, R., 1994).

In conclusion, Reality TV is both reality and unreality. While it includes aspects of reality with genuine reactions to certain themes and elements of reality, it is also largely manipulated by staging, editing, and ingenuine motivation from outer influences.

References

Allen, K., & Mendick, H. (2013). Keeping it real? Social class, young people and ‘Authenticity’ in reality TV. Sociology, 47(3), 460-476.

Grindstaff, L. (2012). Reality TV and the production of ‘Ordinary celebrity’: Notes from the field. Berkeley Journal of Sociology.

Hill, A. (2005) The reality genre. In A. Hill, reality TV: Audiences and popular factual television. (pp. 14 – 40). Oxon: Routledge.

Kilborn, R. (1994). How real can you get?: Recent developments in ‘reality’ television. European Journal of Communication 1994 9: 421 DOI: 10.1177/0267323194009004003

A question often asked when discussing the genre of reality television is, How real is reality television. In this blog, I will be considering this very question.

A note before I begin, what we now call reality television began a resemblance of documentaries (Smith, 2020) that eventually shifted to the new definition (Smith, 2020). The definition for reality television is vague Philippa Smith’s definition as a variety of shows “the only thing they have in common are the so-called “real people” doing real things. Rather than fictional people doing made-up stuff,” (Smith, 2020) Richard Kilborn ops to put aside the format of the show rather focussing on the filmmakers “primary aim” of showcasing the shared experience or lived reality (Kilborn, 1994). So on this basis, one could look at reality television being real simply because the audience watches real people in allegedly unscripted situations the focus for entertainment being their actions and experience during the situation rather than the situation itself.

A good example of this I feel is the Korean reality television series I Live Alone it is a program that’s entire basis is hosts, who are called members, who sit in a studio and watch pre-recorded and edited footage of each of them as they go about their daily life (Hwang, 2013). Not all of their videos are shown in the studio rather they take turns watching how each of them goes about their lives, ever so often they have guests who part take in the filming of their daily life, and the viewers watch as they react to it, it’s a combination of docudrama, video diary and reaction footage (Hwang, 2013). The base never changes as each week new footage is shown of a certain member or guest and how they go about a day and then they react to it (Hwang, 2013). the focus and draw of the show as Kilborn explains is the sharing of the experience (Kilborn, 1994) as each member and guest often express their relatability of the footage shown to their own lives, just as audiences get to see celebrities in their allegedly lived reality of day to day footage where they wake up without makeup and unkempt hair go about eating their favourite food and getting together with their friends. The second layer of reality television of course being the allegedly unscripted authentic reaction by the hosts and their guests to the footage being shown (Hwang, 2013).

Of course, as mentioned reality television varies a great deal in content so, while shows like I Live Alone’s format seems straight forward with no real desire from the audience to watch fast-paced action or large drama there are shows in the reality television section that involves activities such as the challenge show survivor where players, or castaways, spend around thirty-nine days in a camp eliminating each other, real people face real consequences for the decisions they make inside the secluded island as the players have the incentive of monetary gain (Parsons, 2000). We see Kilborn’s definition of reality television on display as yet again the overall scenario and goal of the players are the same, survive long enough to plead your case as to why you should win a million dollars (Parsons, 2000), but it is the player’s reaction to this challenge that draws audiences in because in one season the focus is on how much people will lie and cheat for a million dollars, another will focus on the complete opposite like Survivor all-stars where viewers watched players Boston Rob and Amber Brkich form a relationship through being allies eventually cumulating in Boston Rob proposing to Amber who then goes on to win the million dollars(Parsons, 2003).

These programs stand second to the more recognized reality television shows like Keeping up with the Kardashians a show that follows the Kardashian Jenner family as they get married, get divorced, have children, and the fights and drama in between (Seacrest, 2007). This show which contains what Philippa Smith calls ‘Reality bite’ where events are cut and sequenced for the audience in a way that captivates them through the perceived spontaneity of events (Smith, 2020). This version of alleged authentic reality is more doubted side of reality television as it stands at a larger distance from reality television beginnings of the documentary (Smith, 2020) to the point where an audience laughs when members of the Kardashian Jenner family described reality television as “real people just being themselves”( Shared News, 2019).

All of this to say that to the question How real is reality television, I can’t give a definitive answer and it seems no one else agrees either on the answer to this question. Are there real people? Yes. Is the general premise and situations of the show based in reality? Yes. Is this enough for it to be classified as real? Maybe. So how real is it, that depends on how much investment the audience members place on the shared experience or lived reality created by the filmmakers?

References

Hwang, J Y (Prod dir). (2013) I live alone [television]. Korea: MBC

Kilborn, R. (1994). ‘How real can you get?’: recent devolpments in ‘reality’ television [article]. European Journal of Communication. Retrieved from https://blackboard.aut.ac.nz/bbcswebdav/pid-5350847-dt-content-rid-13171289_4/institution/Papers/ENGL602/Publish/How%20Real%20Can%20you%20get%20%20Characteristics%20of%20RTV.pdf

Parsons, C (creat). (2000). Survivor [television]. United States: CBS

Parsons, C (creat). (2003). All-stars [television]. Survivor. United States: CBS

Seacrest, R (creat). (2007). Keeping up with the Kardashians [television]. United States: E!,

Shared News. (2019). Kim Kardashian & Kendall Jenner laughed at while presenting at 2019 emmys? [Youtube]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2Y7j5Q9tQs

Smith, P (lec). (2020). Reality television part 1 [Lecture PowerPoint]. Retrieved from https://blackboard.aut.ac.nz/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_96250_1&content_id=_5350843_1 Smith, P (lec). (2020). Reality television part 1 [Lecture recording]. Retrieved from https://blackboard.aut.ac.nz/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_96250_1&content_id=_5350843_1

How real is reality tv?

The Cambridge English dictionary defines reality television as television programmes that are filmed of real situations using ordinary people instead of actors.

Reality TV first emerged in the 1990’s and became a success in the early 2000s. (Sanneh, 2011). Reality TV is supposedly an unscripted form of television that films real events and situations in someone’s life. Some shows decide to use a host, and some use a narrator to set the events for the audience. Many people enjoy watching reality TV because they are able to see into the life of others or they are able to find a connection because they may relate to the people or the situation of the people being filmed.

Kilborn (1994) attempts to define reality TV and suggests that there are slice-of-life scenes but also fictional drama rooted scenes to please the audience’s attention. She further explains that the primary objective for reality TV producers is to produce a programme that highlights reality and people’s real experiences. Thankfully, due to the advancement in technology, there are many ways to film reality TV such as: camera team, hidden cameras, personal camcorders, cellphones, body cameras and microphones. If the individual or an amateur is in control of the camera then their shaky shots, focus and weird angles will contribute to the realness of the show.

Kilborn (1994) helps convey that ‘reality’ may not be the reality everyone believes it to be. A cruicial factot in Reality programming is the attempt to simulate drama amongst individuals and groups by over exaggerating the problem and editing in a clever and canny manner. The producers are able to accomplish this by cutting the footage and introducing a hybrid mix of presenter talk, other participants opinions, other footage and material and also forms of audience participation (Kilborn, 1994). This all results in manipulation and distorted footage to the point some viewers question what they are viewing and whether it is authentic.

It isn’t possible to distinguish how real reality television is with a set percentage, this is because there are hundreds of various shows with diverse topics that focus on different content and areas of life. Therefore, all the shows will vary in the amount of drama, people and alteration due to the different featured formats.

References:    

Kilborn, K. (1994). `How real can you get?’: Recent developments in `reality’         television. European Journal of Communication, 9, 421-439. DOI:         10.1177/0267323194009004003

reality TV: meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary. Cambridge Dictionary.    https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/reality-tv.

Sanneh, K. (2011). The Rise and Rise of Reality Television. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/05/09/the-reality-principle.

1.  How real is reality TV?

Reality TV is often questioned for its authenticity. Ranging in subgenres and such as sports, technology, survival, competitions, and social environments to name a few, reality TV is known to be televised around people’s lives. Thanks to media sensationalism, reality TV in the twenty-first century revolves more around dramatized scenarios and footage of participants in apparent ‘structured situations’(Hill, 2005). The emergence of reality tv circa 1950s were subgenres of documentaries, game shows, and crime shows. Until 1980s reality TV remained true to its name before it become a global sensation. In the early 2000s, novel subgenres such as docusoaps, dating shows, and celebrity-like series, as a mixture of American and European cultures, emerged which began to blur the line between the real and the fake. This indistinction led to audiences and critics questioning the popular genre’s credibility.

The factor of authenticity in reality tv lies in its structure and audience perception (Hill, 2005). Key attributes of reality tv include unscripted dialogues between actors, on camera and off camera which is captured through surveillance on sets (Biressi & Nunn, 2005). Much of the situations that are captured live are oftentimes dramatized; simple scenarios such as disagreements between participants are dramatically enhanced with exaggeration of tone and intensity in dialogue delivery (Killborn, 1994). Another factor that contributes to the apparent ‘realness’ is structured environments. Programs such as Big Brother and Temptation Island place participants in simulations in order to test cooperation and compatibility (Bell-Jordan, 2008; Escoffery, 2014). Under the subgenres alike crime, technological, and medical programming, for example Diesel Brothers, Mythbusters, Hoarders to name a few, footages are often authentic as real life issues and challenges are captured and people of the show attempt to solve or apply techniques to approaching an issue (Killborn, 1994; Parton, 2018).

Critics have often approached Reality TV with arguments that probe with foundations of various programming. Bell-Jordan (2008) argues that modern reality TV programmes have become breeding grounds for dispute between participants, which contribute to the apparent display of ‘realness’. More grave than the heightened drama is the representation of struggle and disagreements that occur when participants cohabit; the site of negative situations become a language, or a type of perceived reality for young viewers (Bell-Jordan, 2008; Biressi & Nunn, 2005). Mundane interactions are often over edited or the passing of time in situations are cut short to intense moments, as producers often emphasise that the factor of civility is removed to expose the ‘truth’ of human life under cohabitation (Bell-Jordan, 2008). Audience perception is key possibility throughout modern reality programs as they indirectly invite audience judgment and inference into certain situations that are set up (Killborn, 1994). One example is Crimewatch UK, wherein crime scenes held in public are dramatically heightened to elicit public response; this attribute can also be known as experimentation as actors of the show interact with the oblivious public to witness true and unscripted reactions (Killborn, 1994).

Modern Reality TV is constantly critiqued for its portrayal of over glamorous lives of participants despite the attempt to display ‘real’ scenarios. Moreover, many such programs have become sites of unnecessary disputes that are overtly distressing for viewers, but are still on the run as drama attracts attention from the viewing public.

References

Bell-Jordan, K. E. (2008) Black.White. and a Survivor of The Real World: Constructions of Race on Reality TV. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 25(4), 353-372. doi: 10.1080/15295030802327725

Biressi, A. & Nunn, N. (2005). Real Lives, documentary approaches. In Reality TV: realism and revelation. (pp. 35-58) London: Wallflower.

Escoffery, D. S. (Ed.). (2014). How real is reality TV?: Essays on representation and truth. McFarland.

Hill, A. (2005). Reality TV: Audiences and popular factual television. Routledge.

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

Parton, J. (2018). 8 fakest reality shows. https://screenrant.com/reality-tv-shows-fake-real/

How real is reality tv?

The reality programme is particularly popular in contemporary cultures due to its entertainment purposes. However, how many people know that that popular reality tv programme is blended with facts and fiction? The original reality tv programme is from the United States in 1987, and soon the advantages of these types of tv programme have been discovered (Kilborn, 2011). Firstly, in views of commercial investment, the cost of production is cheap and thus companies do not need massive budget plans to start. Secondly, a large range of audiences. The competitive tv programme soon significantly increased between companies in the United States. According to Kilborn (2011), most reality tv programme does not follow the exclusive and planed footage due to the need to ensure that programme has adequate resources to attract viewers’ attention to follow their shows. More specifically, sufficient entertainment material is a crucial requirement for the contemporary reality tv programme, and this is also an imperative factor that caused many companies to collect resources from people and then pack and present it nowadays (Kilborn, 2011).

Advanced technologies also play a pivotal role in the development of tv programme. It upgrades the reality tv programme to a new era as hidden cameras and the ‘go-everywhere’ cameras devices can be concealed in clothes, small luggage and vehicle. This change due to the new electronic devices brings viewers to a new world that they rely on and trust the programme in terms of authenticity more than their friends and family.

Benefit from the advanced development of technologies, more ideas have been brought to the reality programme. More companies and directors started to blend facts and fictions within the programme for the strong entertainment result (Kilborn, 1994, as cited in Kilborn, 2011). However, several ethical issues arise as results. There are two main issues been identified: how have those material been obtained or collected, and how to ensure the safety and privacy of filed subject (victims) once the records went public. More sub-issues associate with these two main issues, private space for example. Countermeasures toward these issues are not given as companies have their defence system.

The author predicts more new types of reality programme will show with new technologies and designs, and low-cost high rating programme may continually occupy the mainstream programme (Kilborn, 2011). Finally, the author suggests audiences must not blind to face the fact that they need to recognize commercial and entertainment needs and requirements are the dominant factors to decide about what to make for the audiences.

References

Kilborn, K. (1994). `How real can you get?’: Recent developments in `reality’ television. European Journal of Communication, 9, 421-439. DOI: 10.1177/0267323194009004003

How real is reality TV?

In todays day and age, it is fair to assume that there is an unspoken agreement that reality TV is not completely real. With an increasing blurred definition and position on the line between fiction and reality, the ‘realness’ can vary depending on the context or purpose of the show, for example shows that focus on emergency services etc, however it is important to establish that Reality TV is not always made with the purpose to mirror real life.

Reality TV series, like any other show or film, have producers. These producers have the power over the path they want these shows to follow and which participants they believe will clash or gel the best. Some shows that are not openly scripted are those such as Storage Wars, The Apprentice, Catfish, Hell’s Kitchen and Jerry Springer (Baker, 2017). The realities we are shown are constructed in some way – reality TV is not about real life as we know it, but instead intends to construct an entirely new reality (Smith, 2020). Many of these shows will claim authenticity and spontaneity, but are also concerned with extracting as much entertainment potential as possible (Kilborn, 1994), so in considering that reality TV is made by carefully putting together specific interactions and scenes, and showcasing certain personalities, we can understand that these realities are crafted with the intention to move the audience. Allen & Mendick discuss these ideas, and concluded that young, working-class viewers often reject the dominant discourses that pathologise contestants who are also working-class and in turn value their lack of pretentiousness (2013).

Smith stated that as humans we are natural voyeurs who do not want to see the real and abosolute truth, which is remnant of the not wanting to hear the hard truth sometimes. The ability to manipulate how participants are perceived goes hand in hand with an awareness of this. By finding entertainment in observing everyday, seemingly regular people as they fall in and out of love, or we find ourselves favouring certain people to win the competition, illuminates an acceptance of these constructed realities and thus, the human interest in the space between fiction and real (Smith, 2020).

References

Allen, K. & Mendick, H. (2013). Keeping it Real? Social Class, Young People and ‘Authenticity’ in Reality TV. In Sociology, 47(3):460-476. SAGE Publications, 2013.

Baker, A. (2017). 15 ‘Real’ Shows Producers Don’t Want You To Know Are Scripted. Retrieved from https://screenrant.com/reality-tv-shows-scripted-fake/

Kilborn, R. (1994). How real can you get?: Recent developments in ‘reality’ televsion. In European Journal of Communicaton, 9:421. DOI: 10.1177/0267323194009004003

Smith, P. (2020). Reality TV (part one) Recorded lecture.

Smith, P. (2020). Reality TV (part two) Recorded lecture.

How real is reality TV?

Reality TV has become a popular genre throughout the 21st century. It supposedly includes the lives of real people throughout the real world, and how they react in certain situations. It also involves finding regular people and putting them through competitions to see who will win and have the potential to become famous in a certain field. Reality TV today draws people in with a dramatic, yet entertaining script which claims to be authentic but turns out to be heavily scripted. Orbe (2008) explains that reality TV is broadly described as putting normal everyday people in front of a camera and gaining entertainment from their ‘unscripted’ actions. It is also described as a genre that wants its viewers to think of the people involved as non-fiction rather than as ‘actors’. 

Is reality TV really as authentic as it claims to be? This question is asked frequently by many of the individuals who participate in watching it. The answer, although disappointing, is no. Most of the reality TV shows that are watched today consist of a structured story and scripted dialogue. According to Orbe (2008), one of the most popular categories of reality TV are competition shows. Examples of these include American Idol, Ink Master, RuPaul’s Drag Race, Love Island, Big Brother, and even Fear Factor. During these shows, contestants arrive and they are put through challenging tasks in order to win money. A money prize seems to stand out as the most popular reward. In an article written by Gavilanes (2018), many people in the television industry came out with personal stories on what actually happens behind the scenes of reality TV. One individual explained that on many popular singing shows, producers often ‘beg’ contestants for sob stories and the first auditions we see are always never actually the first auditions. Producers carefully handpick contestants and put them through many interviews and auditions, a lot of the time they do not pay attention to the actual singing (Gavilanes, 2018). 

Reality TV has a big following with a diverse range of audience members, but what is the fascination with watching series that we know are scripted. Reiss and Wiltz (2014), explain that there are “16 intrinsic feelings or joys” that measure the fundamental desires of an individual. Reiss and Wiltz (2014) found that reality TV arouses a combination of these feelings and joys which explains the attraction that normal people have to reality entertainment.

References

Gavilanes, G. (2018, August 7). ‘They Beg You for Sob Stories’: 10 People Reveal What Actually Goes Into Filming a Reality TV Show. People. https://people.com/tv/people-talk-filming-reality-tv-show/

Orbe, M. P. (2008). Representations of race in reality TV: Watch and discuss. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 25(4), 345-352.Reiss, S., & Wiltz, J. (2004). Why people watch reality TV. Media psychology, 6(4), 363-378.

Reiss, S., & Wiltz, J. (2004). Why people watch reality TV. Media psychology, 6(4), 363-378.

W11

How real is Reality TV?

Reality Television is how the images, formats of genres of Reality TV fix themselves into the way television, its schedules, structures and viewing cultures conferences (Holmes & Jermyn, 2004). Reality TV is aware of what kind of show they will do to attract broadcasters are seeking to draw audiences in particular ways (Holmes & Jermyn, 2004). The practices relate to their cultural power and multimedia experiences; the ways can resonate so extensively in the culture sphere (Holmes & Jermyn, 2004). Therefore, 

A reality show is the broader context in which showing the difference between the performance and the celebrity culture in every day has not evident (Escoffery, 2014). “Reality TV where the discursive environment has fostered roles which are in part interchangeable: academics and public intellectuals can become contestants/participants, contestants can become media commentators, ad producers can mingle with academics (e.g. Carter)” (Escoffery, 2014). Reality Tv programs can be low living in the house such as the employed urban on housing estates (Dahlgreen, 2013). Some of them can be labelled as “stressing the viewing’s distance from the scenes represented and by facilitating an unethical passivity before representations which are framed and marketed as entertainment” (Hester, 2014). Reality television genre dominate schedules now. It is observed in different ways. Many different types of reality TV nowadays can relate to “politics of identity” or a group power (Biressi and Nunn, 2005). 

For the show Big brother, there is a discussion of the program may be an argument for a different format of the construction of fame. In reality, TV is concerned (Escoffery, 2014). It can pinpoint that the term “Reality TV” gains more comprehensive from this point to another point in areas such as the press, television trade press and TV viewing guides (Escoffery, 2014). Defining things happen in “Reality TV” shows that the importance of a focus on “real life” and “real people” as the primary point in the show through the subject matter in the front. However, whether all the reality show is real, that is still a question to people. The show can capture the real-life, but it doesn’t mean celebrities are showing their life. Reality TV is combined with very self- reflexive and self- conscious connected to create a different form of genres in a reality show (Holmes & Jermyn, 2004). Roscoes’ research how this marks the program of a reality show and Big Brother is not as a real game but as a “reality-life soap”, because of its editing and construction from the perspective of production. 

Reality TV can manipulate the realities that the audience may not be aware of. Reality TV has a prominent link to market the program of reality TV, and it can be stimulated. Reality TV can be in many areas such as marketing, promotion to make a reality show but it can be a “cheap TV” that tend to conflate the “event” or show with other areas of Reality programming. Therefore, that is up to the audience what they think of the reality show on their point of view. Reality show can be real or not depending on how they set the programme to show the audience. How they want to commerce and make fun in reality TV can be rethinking of whether it is real or not. Often some reality shows tend to create fun and combine genre in their performance to attract more audience in their presentation. 

References:

Holmes, S., & Jermyn, D. (Eds.). (2004). Understanding reality television. Psychology Press.

Escoffery, D. S. (Ed.). (2014). How real is reality TV?: Essays on representation and truth. McFarland.

Dahlgreen, W. (2013, May 31) Poverty-Porn TV in Bad Taste? You Gov. Retrieve October 22, 2020, from https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/05/31/poverty-porn-tv-bad-taste/ 

Biressi, A., & Nunn, H. (2005). Reality TV: realism and revelation. London: Wallflower Press. 

How real is Reality TV? 

Reality Television has become more popular within mainstream media over the past two decades and are inexpensive to produce and carry the potential for huge profits (Hill, 2005). 

Reality Television is packaged in many formats and has become something of a “catch-all” phrase commonly used to describe a range of popular factual programming (Hill, 2005). Producing a definition of ‘What is Reality Television?’ is complex due to the range of programming, as well as the extent to which this has shifted over time with the emergence of further permutations in reality-based texts. There is no one definition however a couple of examples are: 

“(Reality TV places) and emphasis on the representation of ordinary people and allegedly unscripted or spontaneous moments that supposedly reveal unmediated reality” 

(Biressi and Nunn, 2005) 

“an unabashedly commercial genre united less by aesthetic rules or certainties than by the fusion of popular entertainment with a self-conscious claim to the discourse of the real” 

“What ties together all the various formats of the reality TV genre are their professed abilities to more fully provide viewers an unmediated, voyeuristic, yet often playful look into what might be called the ‘entertaining real’.” 

(Murray and Ouelette, 2004) 

These examples are evidently more cynical perspective on “ordinary” people as being vulnerable and exploited, at the mercy of ruthless commercial television producers and voyeuristic, uncaring audiences (Murray and Ouelette, 2004). Attached to this is the cliché about “Everyone enjoying their 15 minutes of fame,” which is played out again and again in Reality Television in the desire to become famous. 

The range of Reality Television includes documentaries, game shows, cooking shows, talent shows, scene footage of law and order, emergency services, and more recently anything and everything from people to pets, from birth to death (Hill, 2005). 

How real or not a show is central to reality television as most are a representation of the truth, unscripted real activities of real people, created for entertainment purposes as the line becomes blurred between what is real and what is fake.  

British television documentary such as fly-on-the-wall and docusoaps are characterized by discrete observational filming without trying to analyze the situation, whereby audiences assess the facts presented and come up with their own conclusions (Biressi & Nunn, 2005). The capacity to let viewers see for themselves is the defining characteristic that unites the many definitions from a television industry, scholar and audience perspective to classify Reality Television. Audiences judge the ‘reality’ of reality programmes according to a fact/fiction continuum, with infotainment or docu-soaps at one end and formatted reality gameshows at the other end (Hill, 2005) and are less concerned about the absolute truth instead more interested in the experience (Murray and Ouelette, 2004).   

How real is Reality Television is ultimately up to the viewer on the point of where it sits in the spaces between fact and fiction as this genre continues to develop.  

REFERENCES 

Biressi, A. & Nunn, N. (2005). Real Lives, documentary approaches. In Reality TV: realism and 

revelation. (pp. 35-58) London: Wallflower. 

Hill, A. (2005) The reality genre. In A. Hill, Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television. (pp. 14 – 40). Oxon: Routledge. 

Murray, S., Ouellette, L. (2004) Reality TV: remaking television culture. New York University Press. 

Smith, P. (2020). Reality Television Part One. Popular Genres (ENGL602) Week 11. Powerpoint. Retrieved from https://blackboard.aut.ac.nz