Introduction
It is easy to dismiss Reality TV as media “junk food,” and a kind of entertainment that is created to appeal to the lowest common denominators of taste. This view, however, ignores both the extensive variety of programming and the consistent popularity of it across all demographics. If this is “junk food,” it comes in many forms and is consumed by all types of people. Then, there is the matter of the popularity in itself as revealing elements of our society. However it happens, something is resonating within millions to establish Reality TV as a billion-dollar industry. Different formats appeal to different viewers, or offer different satisfactions to the same audience. What they all have in common are effects going to the promotion of self-esteem and a need for communal experience. As I explore elements of Reality TV in the following, what will be seen is the fact that the genre, and in all of its variations, reflects desires in the public to both connect with others and feel empowered, or elevated, above those others.
Discussion
As I focus on Reality TV and what its implications are for society, I first take a look at an attitude I seem to have in common with the majority of the society itself. That is, my first inclination is to denounce the subject as trash. I want to say that it is not something I ever engage with, and that it is a form of entertainment very likely not serving any purpose whatsoever. This is not the truth because, like so many others, I actually watch a good amount of Reality TV. I simply do not wish to admit to it, as others do not and as is confirmed by studies: “Audience members do not claim to spend much time thinking about the more outlandish doings of reality program cast members. Nevertheless, they may spend quite a bit of time talking about them” (Hall 527). To be honest, then, I place myself among the vast audiences.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"How Does Reality TV Reflect on Our Society?".
This leads me to then look for levels of quality. This is a reasonable and probably common approach. After all, it is in not demeaning to be known as a fan of high-quality entertainment, and the nearest type of this found in Reality TV is the competition. American Idol, for example, is blatantly sensational in production and appeals to viewer emotion. At the same time, it presents actual people engaged in a critical audition process. Viewers become emotionally invested in favorites, as I do, and this then generates a kind of communal support affecting the audience. When I discuss the show with others, we are meeting through a common value. Then, there is the appeal of “power.” This lies in the way we viewers take on the role of judges ourselves, along with the show using viewer votes. It is a strong attraction, as studies have established: “The appeal of the immediate, unmediated, individual response is gloriously realized by Idol in the heat of a national campaign of singing talents fighting for recognition” (Kjus 296). Idol, then, perfectly reveals how Reality TV creates communal feeling and heightened senses of empowerment.
Other competition shows reflect other aspects of society. This is inevitable; as the casts are selected to represent certain types of men and women, all the societal factors of gender roles, status, and ethics are involved. I find this to be particularly true of Celebrity Apprentice. While the program obviously does not feature ordinary people, the competition aspect nonetheless exposes current societal issues. One that has been examined is how males are treated and behave on the show, and a study finds an interesting reflection of shifting gender roles in these interactions of the contestants: “The TV show seems to challenge the appropriateness of the masculine leadership style and cast doubt on its effectiveness in doing leadership” (Sung 44). Even as men dominate on the show, they are subject to intense doubt from the women, and this points to the changes in gender roles within the culture itself. At the same time, Apprentice relies on the same attractions of Idol. Viewers come together having experienced the show, and feel as well all the more elevated because they are “judging” others who are perceived as being elite.
The “lower end” of the Reality TV spectrum more promotes judging, which in turn supports a societal need to feel that empowered. The quality of communal appeal exists here as well; viewers are encouraged to perceive the casts as they would people living in their own neighborhoods. Stronger than this, however, is how these programs deliberately emphasize differences in status and personal quality. There can be no argument that a show like Honey Boo Boo, following the lives of poor, unattractive people, is offered to enhance viewers’ ideas of themselves. The same is true of Teen Mom, a show featuring the same kind of “trailer trash” struggling in daily living. Viewers enjoy the contrast between themslves and the characters, a contrast revealing themselves to be superior. The same appeal is in a program like Keeping Up with the Kardashians, in spite of the glamorous lives of the stars. Because the Kardashians behave in vulgar ways, the audience can overlook their wealth and easily look down on them. These Reality programs powerfully reveal how the society looks to any evidence supporting its own superiority.
Conclusion
The many types of Reality TV programming offer a wide variety of differing attractions for viewers. Some, as with Celebrity Apprentice, more directly indicate aspects of our society through the natures of the competitions themselves. Others exist to more gratuitously appeal to a desire to feel superior to others and, importantly, others who are presented as real. This last effect is in fact common to the genre; whether it is an aspiring pop star or a poor, unwed mother. The viewers take away a sense of heightened self-esteem because they are not as needy, uneducated, or unattractive as these TV stars. Then, all of the programs create a kind of national community. Viewers eagerly discuss the people within them with the confidence and informality of discussing “real” neighbors. Reality TV may be derided as mindless and/or strictly gratuitous. At the same time, it belongs to the society and the society embraces it. This reinforces my view that the genre of Reality TV reflects consistent ambitions in the public to both connect with others and feel more empowered, or superior to others.
- Hall, A. “Perceptions of the authenticity of reality programs and their relationships to audience involvement, enjoyment, and perceived learning.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 53.4 (2009): 515-531.
- Kjus, Y. “Idolizing and monetizing the public: The production of celebrities and fans, representatives and citizens in reality TV.” International Journal of Communication 3 (2009): 277-300.
- Sung, C. C. M. “Language and gender in a US reality TV show: An analysis of leadership discourse in single-sex interactions.” Nordic Journal of English Studies 12.2 (2013): 25- 51.
