Reality TV: No, It's Not!
Posted: Tuesday, October 04, 2005
by Danny Davids
by Danny Davids Okay, before I start, let me confess: I definitely enjoy watching “The Apprentice" (Donald’s, not Martha’s). I was hooked on the recent show “Rock Star: INXS". And I was a huge fan of the short-lived series “The Mole". Having admitted that, even I can see by watching excerpts of such shows as CBS’s “Big Brother", A&E’s “Airline", and TLC’s “Trading Spaces" that while this may be TV, it most definitely is not reality. And They Didn’t Know The Camera Was There It’s not like this concept is new. Remember “Candid Camera"? Place a hidden camera somewhere, get a group of actors to do something strange or silly or weird around normal people (that would be like, say, you and me), and watch the reactions. There was no script and cost was minimal. Did it work? Well, in its first three incarnations (originally “Candid Microphone" during World War II in the late 40s, then two different “Camera" television versions in the early 50s and again in the 60s) it did amazingly well. (A fourth reincarnation in the 90s, “The New Candid Camera", didn’t do as well.) Why? Most likely because the reactions of the unsuspecting public caught on film were unrehearsed, unexpected, and most importantly, entertaining. So how does today’s reality TV show differ from “Candid Camera"? Opposites Attract The key is in the definition. Television is an entertainment media. So what television mogul decided that reality was entertaining? If it was, televisions all over the world would be turned off and people would be out in the real world, experiencing real life, and having a blast doing so (oh yeah, and the entertainment industry wouldn’t exist). The fact is, unless the next-door neighbor is a talented comic, or a close friend is a perpetual klutz living some esoteric lifestyle on the lunatic fringe, reality for us is pretty normal. What we want to see on television (and in the movie theaters, and on the stage) is UN-normal, UN-boring, UN-reality. Therefore, by definition, “reality TV" is an oxymoron (you know, like “jumbo shrimp" or “pretty ugly"). Especially in a day and age when we’re bombarded with state-of-the-art graphics, breathtaking action, and stunningly beautiful people in every media presentation we see, putting normal people in front of the camera isn’t going to generate a whole lot of interest. Neither will using normal situations we encounter in everyday life. It’s just not exciting enough to generate the ratings advertisers want to see when they plunk down their money for a 30-second spot. It’s About The Economy, Stupid If a television executive can cut costs on a show, the bottom line is increased profits. One way to do so is to eliminate some of the personnel required to pull the show together. However, reducing costs can reduce show quality, which means lower ratings, which means reducing prices for advertising, which means further reducing costs, which means…well, you get the idea. It’s a fine line to walk. Following the trend of British television, somebody decided that using non-actors with a non-scripted format would save money and still be interesting. Well, at least the save money part was correct. The end result is people who can’t act (like, duh!) in everyday situations that are as exciting to watch as the proverbial not-yet-boiling pot. So the next change was to put these non-actors in exotic locales doing unique things. That was a little better, but there was still no hit show. And so the third modification came into being, with non-actors being coached in how to act and react “naturally" to the various situations they encountered. In other words, a few of the scriptwriters came back, doing a lot less of what they’d done before. Suddenly, non-actors in unreal situations were reacting in ways that would make a drama queen proud. Tweak a show’s concept to play off that interaction, and bam! The ratings started to soar, as did advertising prices. The UN-Real Life There’s a new trend that’s becoming more prevalent these days—entertainment celebrities sharing their “normal" lives with us mere mortals. Please. Does anybody really believe that Ozzie Osbourne, or Paris Hilton, or the Gotti clan have ever experienced “normal"? These people have spent huge chunks of their lives in front of the cameras and in the media, getting what they want when they want, and being insulated from the normal goings-on of life that we all experience. “Normal" to these people is overbearing, obnoxious, decadent pampering to those of us who actually live in the real world. There’s no way we can relate, which is exactly why these shows are so popular. It’s reality the way we want it to be for us—exotic, exciting, entertaining. We see former stars and also-rans thrown together in odd combinations as roommates, as weight-loss partners, or as cute, quirky, mismatched couples. And shows like “American Idol" and USA Network’s “Nashville Star" bring in a new twist by letting viewers participate in the process that determines who the next big media darling will be. None of this is real life in any sense of the word that the average television viewer can understand. Instead, it’s reality the way we want it to be—exotic, exciting, entertaining. So, Is This Reality? This may be a good trend for television (and possibly the film industry, although early attempts at this have failed miserably). Obviously viewers are enjoying the entertainment that these shows provide. My guess is we haven’t seen the last of reality television. However, anyone who seriously believes that these shows reflect what’s going on in the real world needs…well, a serious dose of reality. About the author: Danny Davids is an award-winning songwriter who is currently working in conjunction with a startup production company to launch a new educational children’s television show.
This Article has been viewed 1,717 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (4 total)Hey Danny, I appreciate the clarity of your response. But why don't you dig a little deeper? WHY is this concept attractive? What "buttons" is it pushin'? Give me some help with your solution: They need a serious dose of reality. What reality?
A very enjoyable "read". Looking forward to seeing a children's show that this author's "bio" refers to. If this article bears any semblance to the show, I speculate that it will be a very charming show for all ages.
Wow! Well thought out and verbalizing what many of us have thought but haven't taken the time to write. It definitely explains why some reality shows are enjoyable and some are not worth finding the remote. We need more from YOU. Way to go!!!!!!
Clever, articulate, thoroughly enjoyable read! I like the original 'reality' program
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.