Week 12

[Blog contributions: WK 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (no lecturer’s comment), 9 and 12]

How have game shows influenced reality TV?

The influence of game-shows on reality TV can be seen through what elements of game-shows may occur in reality TV. These elements may include:

• Happenings being captured as they occur by using “lightweight, portable cameras” (Bruzzi, as cited in Hall, 2005a, p. 20), which is, in turn, an influence from observational documentaries (Hall, 2005a). This gives the audience the impression that they are right there with the reality as it is occurring (Bruzzi as cited in Hall, 2005a).
  

• “Interaction between non-professional actors and celebrities” (Hall, 2005a, p. 21) may occur. Programme example: America’s Next Top Model where the host is Tyra Banks a renown model and the wanna-be ‘top models’ are ordinary people.
  

• Audience participation occurs to make decisions concerning the programme and its participants (Hall, 2005a). This can be audience responses via, for example, texting. Programme example: American Idol where the audience can have a say in which participant leaves the show.
  

• A mixture of “luck, knowledge and skill” (Hall, 2005a, p. 22) may be incorporated to varying degrees.

• Decision-making is placed on everyday people, which is life-altering (Hall, 2005a).

• “The reveal” (Hall, 2005a, p. 23), which centres on the emotional reactions of, for example, the programme participants or family members when the results of the show are displayed (Hall, 2005a). These ‘reveals’ can include physical changes in participants, for example, The Biggest Loser (weight loss), or the winning or losing emotions of participants, for example, Project Runway.

How ‘real’ is reality TV?

Reality TV is comprised of a number of programme formats, among these being documentary realism which deals with “realism, accuracy and truth” (Hall, 2005a, p.19). But since reality TV is also shaped by “entertainment formats” (Hall, 2005a, p. 20) it cannot stay solely within the bounds of documentary realism (Hall, 2005a) which, therefore, brings into question how real each reality TV programme is.

Considering this, I think reality TV is put into question also by the demands of scheduled time and audience expectations. For example, if a programme is an hour long, then surely cuts may be made to the programme to present the most entertaining portions of the raw footage, but which may, therefore, not accurately portray, participants or events.

Additional reality problems stemming out of documentary-type programmes which have helped to shape reality TV include, for example, no separation between reality and non-reality (Nichols, 1991, 1994, as cited by Hall, 2005a); settings may not be accurate (Paget, 1998, as cited by Hall, 2005a) and supposed reality can mimic the documentary genre but take on an unreal standpoint (Roscoe & Hight, 2001, as cited in Hall, 2005a).

However, some reality TV programmes can be extremely real right down to showing explicit reality scenes, such as may occur within the Emergency type reality shows (Hall, 2005a). An example of how real and unreal a reality TV show can be, I think, is when Hall discusses Temptation Island. He mentions “staged flirtations and surveillance footage” (p. 35). Yet it was apparently real enough to estrange couples and for another show The Last Resort to try to salvage the damaged relationships which occurred in the former show (Hall, 2005a).

In conclusion, I think that it depends on the type of reality TV programme as to the level of “realism, accuracy and truth” (Hall, 2005a, p. 20) which is portrayed, as well as the moral integrity of the producers and the audience for which the programme is designed.

Why is reality TV so popular for both programme makers and TV viewers?

Reality TV is popular with programme makers for several reasons, including:

• They can be made more cheaply than some other types of programmes, such as older-style documentaries (Hill, 2005a). Also, for example, “an hour-long reality series typically costs . . . only half of what the networks pay in license fees for a 60 minute dramatic series” (Dempsey, 1991, as cited in Hall, 2005a, p. 25).

Hill (2005b) mentions “non-professional actors, unscripted dialogue” (p. 41) in another context than the one being discussed here, but I think these are two examples of what can make these programmes less expensive to produce. That is, actors do not have to be paid tremendous amounts and the costs involved in using dedicated scriptwriters are reduced. In some cases, the actors may involve themselves in the programme because of the financial rewards they can win, for example, the programme Survivor, a reality game-show, where “contestants . . . compete to win a million” (Hill, 2005a, p. 31), or, in the case of other game shows, much less than this (Hill, 2005a).

• Such factors as developments in technology and deregulation of the broadcasting industry (which introduced new players to the industry) have meant that the less expensive reality TV shows allowed players to “compete in a competitive environment of network, cable and independent broadcasting” (Hall, 2005a, p. 17).

• Reality TV was the successful replacement of programmes with declining audiences, so they had the ability to increase ratings at peak television viewing times (Hall, 2005a). In other words, if reality TV had been unsuccessful, then it would not have been popular with TV programmers. Since TV is continually coming up with various types of formats (Hall, 2005a), I’m sure some other format would have emerged instead.

• Reality TV can be made locally and have been financially successful, even on a world-wide basis (Hall, 2005a).

• Reality TV can continually reshape its formats (Kilborn, 2003, as cited by Hall, 2005a) and can appeal to a broad audience (Hall, 2005a). Example: Temptation Island which appealed to people aged 18-49 (Hall, 2005a).

There are several reasons why reality TV is popular with viewers, including:

• Viewers are generally interested in watching others in difficult situations to see what happens (Hall, 2005a).

• Viewers can participate in shows, for example, via telephone (Hall, 2005a), and so feel as if they have some effect on the outcome. Example: Big Brother where “7 million viewers telephoned Channel 4’s hotline to vote for the winner” (Hall, 2005a, p. 32).

• Viewers are interested in the human drama that unfolds, for example, the “emotional tensions and psychological machinations of contestants who compete” (Hall, 2005a, p. 31).

• The shows can either incorporate ordinary people that the viewers can relate to, or celebrities, or a combination of the two, and cover a wide range of topics (Hall, 2005a).

• Reality TV is generally not high-brow (Hall, 2005a) with the main focus of reality TV being “diversion rather than enlightenment” (Kilborn, 2003, as cited in Hall, 2005a, p. 19).

• Reality TV can give an audience suspenseful moments, rather than being boring (Hall, 2005a).

• Viewers can see modified reality TV programmes which are more in tune with their society’s norms and values (Kilborn, 1994, as cited by Hall, 2005a), as opposed to their reality TV viewing being unaltered overseas imports (for example, reality TV from the U.S.A.) (Hall, 2005a). As Hall (2005a) states, viewer response to reality TV programmes can differ from country to country, for example, programmes which appeal to Americans may not appeal to overseas audiences.
  

• Viewers may not be subjected to watching the same programme continuously as reality programmes, for example, reality game-shows, “do not lend themselves to repeat viewing” (Hall, 2005a, p. 38) which means that viewers can anticipate seeing something new.

References

Hill, A. (2005a). The rise of reality TV. In A. Hill, Reality TV: audiences and popular factual television. (pp. 15-40). Oxon: Routledge.

Hill, A. (2005b). The reality genre. In A. Hill, Reality TV: audiences and popular factual television. (pp. 41-56). Oxon: Routledge.