Reality TV is Harmless

Thesis: Like the myriad of other television programs crowding the airwaves, reality television programs are entertaining and harmless. While it may be a form of "low culture," to suggest that reality television is a form of social commentary on the state of the human condition or that it encourages deviant behavior and social mores is a gross overstatement. Summary: While at times tacky, reality television is nothing more than entertaining and harmless. While some reality programming undeniably depicts irresponsible and degrading behavior, it does not promote such behavior any more than crime dramas encourage viewers to commit criminal acts or soap operas encourage viewers to commit infidelity. More importantly, every American citizen retains the simple right to merely change the channel or turn his or her television off. Reality TV Reality television--a genre that documents, in an unscripted manner, the exploits of "real life" people (as opposed to fictional characters portrayed by professional actors)--offers a pop cultural product that is sometimes decidedly lowbrow. In this regard, it is no different from, or worse than, much of the programming that now dominates American television. Graphic violence, profane language, and increasingly explicit displays of sexuality have become commonplace during the prime-time viewing slots across most of the major, for-profit networks. As ratings for reality television shows attest, huge numbers of American viewers find such programming mindlessly-and harmlessly--entertaining. Reality shows regularly rank among the most popular network offerings and continue to generate enormous profits for broadcasters. When it made its American debut in 2000, for example, Survivor, one of the all-time most successful reality television shows, drew some 50 million viewers for its season finale, and brought in an estimated $30 million in profit for CBS. Although many critics of reality television contend that reality programming promotes irresponsible and degrading behavior, there is little concrete evidence to support this. While it frequently portrays crass and foolish antics, reality programming is no more harmful than any other programming type or genre. It no more promotes objectionable behavior in society than fictional crime dramas encourage viewers to commit criminal acts or soap operas encourage infidelity. A Long & Benign Tradition of Voyeuristic Television The entertainment value of capturing, in voyeuristic fashion, the behavior of real-life people is a concept as old as the television industry itself. As early as 1948, American television viewers were captivated by Candid Camera, a show that used hidden cameras to film ordinary people reacting to pranks played upon them. A similar formula has enjoyed a great degree of success in the twenty-first century, as evidenced by hidden-camera vehicles such as Punk'd, which revolves around the unsuspecting victims of staged practical jokes. Another similar show, America's Funniest Home Videos, which centers on submitted homemade videos, is entering its twenty-first season in 2010. The prank format is not the only type of reality programming with deep roots. Dating shows, game shows, and talent competitions also trace their origins to earlier eras of the television medium. Years before Survivor, American Idol, The Bachelorette, The Amazing Race, Project Runway, Deadliest Catch, and Top Chef hit the airwaves, American viewers were entranced by the likes of Star Search, The Newlyweds, The Dating Game, and Cops. The triumphs--and humiliation--of average people thrust into the spotlight have long fascinated the American viewing audience and without any discernible harmful effects on American society at large. In some cases, reality television arguably has served to benefit society by provoking honest dialog about real and pressing social issues. The landmark 1973 PBS series An American Family, which offered an intimate look at the daily lives and troubled marriage of an ordinary California couple, encouraged newly frank discussions and understandings of the topic of divorce. It also broke a longstanding taboo by openly acknowledging the homosexuality of the family's oldest son. MTV's The Real World, which made its debut in 1992, with its documentary-style examination of young adults grappling with issues not just of romance, but also of politics, faith, prejudice, sexuality, health issues, and substance abuse, is widely credited with raising awareness about the HIV/AIDS crisis. During its third season, one of the Real Worldparticipants, Pedro Zamora, a charismatic twenty-year-old openly gay man, disclosed his HIV-positive status to his housemates and a national viewing audience. Former President Bill Clinton lauded Zamora for humanizing the experience of living with HIV and for helping to focus international attention on a global public health issue. Crass but Not Dangerous It is indisputable that some reality television shows feature participants taking foolish risks and engaging in outrageous or disgusting behavior. Stunt competitors on Fear Factor, for example, have paraded nude down a runway in front of a crowd, bobbed for objects floating in a vat of cow blood, and eaten live spiders; participants on The Swan, in a bid to makes themselves conventionally attractive, have subjected themselves to extreme makeovers that included plastic surgery; and overzealous parents featured on Toddlers and Tiaras, which chronicles the child beauty pageant circuit, "dolled" up their children with makeup, spray tans, and fake hair and eyelashes in pursuit of titles and cash. Such crass behavior has led some critics to condemn reality television for exploiting participants and showcasing greed, vanity, cruelty, and humiliation. Such dubious morality, however, can also found in abundance on fictional television programs. Top-rated, "mainstream" shows such as NCIS, Dexter, and Law and Order: Special Victims Unit regularly portray depraved behavior in salacious detail. Yet little evidence exists suggesting the potential for such shows to encourage significant numbers of viewers to

emulate serial murderers, sex offenders, or domestic abusers. To demonize reality television as having a greater potential than fictional television to influence the morals and behaviors of viewers is illogical. If anything, the knowledge that real people rather than actors are engaging in reprehensible behavior would seem more likely to make such behavior that much more repugnant. Freewill, Free Speech & Parental Responsibility As offensive and foolish as some reality television programming is, tastelessness does not equate to harmful. A robust democracy depends, in fact, on the sanctity of free expression, even--and especially--the most noxious forms of expression, such as pornography, hate speech, flag burning, or military funeral protests. In light of those more noxious forms of expression, reality show contestants eating spiders or getting nose jobs in the pursuit of cash prizes is comparatively tame. The popularity of the reality genre suggests that a majority of the viewing public responds to such programming in a tongue-in-cheek fashion and does not perceive it as inherently dangerous. It is true that credible studies have suggested that children exposed to copious amounts of media violence can suffer damaging effects in terms of increased aggression, shorter attention spans, and disrespectful behavior. Reality television programs, however, are not broadcast during afterschool or Saturday morning timeslots for good reason--these are programs intended, by and large, for adult consumption. It is the responsibility of parents, using common sense and parental control blocking technology, to police their children's television viewing habits. It is not the job of broadcast executives to ensure that children aren't being exposed to inappropriate, potentially harmful subject matter. If viewers find the reality television genre--or any other programming genre, for that matter--offensive and dangerous, they can send a message to broadcasters simply by tuning out. The bottom line is that no one can be coerced into watching a reality show or into participating in one. Freedom of choice is an intrinsic part of the American democratic experience. That freedom includes the right of competent adults to engage in--or derive entertainment value from--degrading spectacles, at their own personal moral peril, with no need of government or industry intrusion to protect them from such tastelessness. The evidence--or more specifically, the lack of evidence--suggests that any harmful effects of reality television lie more in the eye of the beholder than in any objective, statistically supported reality. Ponder This 1. Explain what distinguishes reality television from other programming genres. Do you agree or disagree with the author's premise that these distinguishing factors are largely insignificant? 2. This article contends that not only are reality television shows, for the most part, harmless but that, in some cases, they serve a valuable function. What examples does the author give to support this point? Give your own examples that also illustrate this point or explain the weakness, in your opinion, of this argument. 3. Many of the arguments insisting on the harmfulness of reality television focus on its alleged effects on children. How does the author respond to such arguments? Do you agree or disagree? Why? 4. According to the article, tolerance of reality television shows, no matter how tasteless, is the price of living in a free, democratic society. Explain the strength and weakness inherent in this argument.

Also Read: http://www.tvguide.com/news/why-reality-tv-good-for-us-1067294.aspx

Reality TV is Harmful
Thesis: While reality television may appear to be mindless, but otherwise harmless, entertainment, it has created a culture where people are willing to engage in humiliating, dangerous, and even illegal activity in order to achieve temporary fame and notoriety. This is a dangerous precedent that should not be encouraged. Summary: The "reality television" genre has existed almost as long as television itself, but its enormous growth in popularity over the past decade has raised concerns about whether these shows are merely mindless entertainment, or if they are actively harmful. Many people desperate for their "fifteen minutes of fame" are willing to exploit themselves, their families, and even engage in criminal behavior, all for the sake of appearing on television. By continuing to develop new reality shows, some with even more outrageous situations, producers and television stations are encouraging bad behavior and contributing to a growing problem. In the Beginning The "reality television" genre has existed almost as long as television itself. Some of the earliest examples of reality shows included Candid Camera(19482004), which began in the late 1940s. Similar to the MTV show Punk'd (2003 2007), Candid Camera featured the show's producers playing an elaborate prank, while hidden cameras captured the reaction of the unsuspecting victim. Other early "reality" shows consisted of game shows, interview shows, or talent shows, where contestants would usually appear on a single episode, in contrast to the full-season format common today. Over time, reality shows evolved into episodes of edited footage from cameras that followed people around all day for several weeks or months, supposedly to capture the "reality" of the subject's life. One early American show in this style was MTV's The Real World, whose first season was filmed in New York in 1992. The show was billed as a combination soap opera and social experiment, to observe how seven strangers from across the country could live together in a new city. The producers

cast people with big show-business dreams, and focused on dramatic storylines such as a budding romance between two of the roommates, a long-term relationship for a gay cast member, and racial tension within the house. When the show filmed its third season in San Francisco in 1994, producers cast the abrasive and arguably homophobic Puck alongside Pedro, a gay man living with HIV. Between the constant fighting, the timeliness of HIV as a social issue in the mid-1990s, and Pedro's deteriorating health, the show's ratings increased dramatically, and people outside of MTV's usual audience began to take notice. The Real World continues to be a fixture on MTV, and as of 2010, was filming its 24th season in New Orleans. A recent season of the show, which was filmed in Sydney, Australia, featured the tag line: "As soon as these seven strangers move into their amazing apartment overlooking Darling Harbour in Sydney, the catfights, drunken nights and hot tub hookups ensue!" Thus, the show's intent appears to have shifted from observing young adults, to a contrived situation meant to capture violent, criminal, or sexual activity on television for the sake of ratings and media coverage. Not only does this premise promote bad behavior that should not be encouraged in young people, but it places the individuals who participate at risk of establishing a permanent, negative reputation by engaging in this behavior on television. Family Troubles & Exploitation Reality television has been littered with shows such as The Bachelor (2002- ), Who Wants to Marry a MultiMillionaire (2000), and Joe Millionaire (2003), which seek to marry off their contestants within a single season. While dating shows have been on television since the 1960s, the stakes on those early shows were much lower. For example, on The Dating Game (19651973), one person would ask questions of three potential suitors, and choose the one with whom he or she wanted to go on a date. This is in stark contrast to The Bachelor, whose producer has admitted that the contestants engage in sexual activity during the season, and which is expected to end with the final remaining contestant getting engaged to the "prize." Many shows also claim to capture the "realities" of family life, but instead document, and perhaps even contribute to, their unraveling. Newlyweds: Nick and Jessica aired on MTV from August 2003 to March 2005, and followed the marriage of country-pop singer Jessica Simpson and former boy-band member Nick Lachey, who had wed in 2002. The couple filed for divorce within a few months after the show ended, and Lachey later said in an interview with newspaper USA Today that the show played a part in the split, because they had each adopted "personas" in front of the camera which were hard to give up even in private. 'Til Death Do Us Part, also on MTV, followed the courtship and marriage of guitarist Dave Navarro and model/actress Carmen Elektra. The show aired from January to March of 2004, but the couple divorced in 2006. Navarro later admitted that much of the footage for the show was staged, since it is difficult to "be real" when there is an eight-person camera crew following you around and in your house at all hours of the day. More recently, audiences watched the demise of the twenty-four-year-long marriage of former wrestler Hulk Hogan and his wife Linda on the show Hogan Knows Best. The show aired on VH1 from July 2005 to October 2007, but the marriage ended with a divorce filing in November 2007, which Hulk claimed he learned about from a local television station. There are additional concerns when reality shows involve children. The show Jon and Kate Plus 8 first aired on Discovery Health, and then on The Learning Channel (TLC), from 2007 until 2009. The couple, Jon and Kate Gosselin, already had twin girls when Kate gave birth to sextuplets (six babies) in 2004. The show had hoped to follow the happy couple as they learned how to manage the challenge of eight children, but as time went on, the show increasingly featured episodes showing Jon and Kate with the kids, but apart from each other. In 2009, the couple divorced amid allegations that Jon was cheating, and TLC ended the show. Intense media coverage followed, and many wondered who was caring for the children while Jon was making public appearances at parties and Kate was competing in the reality show Dancing With the Stars. As of May 2010, TLC is about to premiere its follow-up show, Kate Plus 8, to document Kate as she acts as a single-parent to her eight children. While the original intent behind the show may have been educational, the unfortunate result of this media attention is that it interferes with normal family life. It is difficult to have a private moment with a child or spouse when your home is invaded by cameras; this becomes especially problematic when conflicts arise, and cannot be resolved because "television personas" get in the way of genuine communication. These depictions of "reality" give viewers a false impression of what family life is like. It can also encourage people like Nadia "Octomom" Suleman to exploit their children. Suleman was a single mother of six children receiving welfare payments when she conceived octuplets (eight babies) through in vitro fertilization. While there are conflicting reports about her intentions, she appears to have expected to support her family through reality television shows, book deals, and other endorsements. She even filed to federally trademark the name "Octomom" in 2009. Unfortunately for her and the children, these deals were not as forthcoming as she had hoped, perhaps due to the public's widespread disapproval of what they learned about her life. As of 2010, she had participated in several one-off television specials, and was supposedly still in discussions with several production companies about reality shows that will follow the children until they turn eighteen. Sadly, the children are too young to have a say in whether they would like to participate in such an endeavor. Outright Danger & Criminal Behavior Sometimes the mix of narcissistic and volatile personalities can turn criminal and downright dangerous. Even if the behavior is not caused by the show itself, the lure of fame and possible fortune from reality show stardom can entice people to do things that go beyond the bounds of being morally and ethically questionable, and into the realm of criminal behavior and actual danger. On October 15, 2009, Richard Heene and his wife Mayumi contacted the Federal Aviation Administration and a local television station to report that their six-year-old son was trapped in a weather balloon the family had launched, and was floating over eastern Colorado. Numerous government rescue agencies, including the National Guard, the US Forest Service, and local sheriff and fire companies, rushed to rescue the boy.

When the balloon finally landed about 15 miles east of Denver International Airport, the boy was not on board. A ground search ensued, but the boy was later "found" when he came out of his hiding spot at his family's home a few hours later. After an investigation, it was learned that his parents had set up the entire event as a hoax to gain publicity for a "mad scientist" reality show that Richard Heene had been trying unsuccessfully to pitch. While the boy was unharmed, the hoax delayed flights at Denver International Airport and cost authorities more than $47,000, plus personnel time and equipment, to conduct a needless search. The Heenes have since been sentenced to jail time and probation and were required to pay damages for the cost of the falsely-reported search. Even when bad behavior is not explicitly encouraged by the producers, reality shows often attract and offer a platform for notoriety for questionable individuals. Back in 2000, near the start of the current reality-show craze, Fox aired a two-hour special Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire, which was a dating show designed to choose a wife from among several contestants for bachelor Rick Rockwell. After the show, it was discovered that not only was Rockwell not a millionaire, he also had a restraining order filed against him by an ex-girlfriend. In 2008, contestant Ryan Alexander Jenkins appeared on a pretaped VH1 reality show Meghan Wants a Millionaire, whose goal was to marry off gold-digger and serial reality-show-participant Meghan Hausserman to a man with a net worth of one million dollars or greater. In August 2009, Jenkins was accused of murdering his model/Playboy representative wife Jasmine Fiore, whom he had met and married shortly after the show had finished taping. The show was never aired. Ultimately, the promise of a reality show encourages irresponsible behavior, and grants a platform for fame and notoriety to narcissistic, volatile, and even dangerous individuals. It creates an incentive to engage in activities that are not healthy, and sometimes even dangerous to themselves and others, all in the hopes of appearing on television. Ponder This 1. The author uses several examples to support the argument that reality shows promote irresponsible behavior. Is this an effective technique? Why or why not? 2. The author suggests that, even when reality shows are not directly responsible for bad behavior, they still have some responsibility to not offer a public platform to potentially dangerous people. Is there sufficient support for this argument? Why or why not? 3. The author does not provide any counterexamples (i.e., examples of how reality shows are not harmful) in the argument. Does this weaken the overall argument? Why or why not? 4. Read the article for word choice. What words or phrases are particularly effective in reinforcing some of the author's arguments? 5. What are the author's most and least convincing examples? Why?

Also Read: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-green/reality-tv-rewarding-bad-_b_3606641.html