“The popularity of reality TV has led to a dangerous blurring
of boundaries between fact and fiction… as a result reality TV has had a
negative effect on modern society”.
Reality TV has quickly arisen to be one of the most popular
television genres over the last decade. Since “The Only Way is Essex” began in
October 2010,it has become a part of popular-culture andhas ignited a conveyer
belt of other similar programmes – such as “Made in Chelsea”, “Geordie Shore”
and “The Valleys” - which fall into a new mainstream category of ‘dramality’ or
structured-reality television. ‘Dramality’ is a hybrid of drama and reality TV
genres; with no speech or reactions scripted with scenarios mediated by the
producers to create narrative and spectacle to primarily entertain its
audience.Although this genre is detested by a significant proportion of society;
we must questionwhy it is so popular. It could be described as notoriously
addictive – as Hill (2007) describes it as “junk food television”[1]or striving to replicate
the superficial lifestyles the ‘characters’ lead. Surely, with much more
substantial and serious issues surrounding our lives – including poverty and
the dwindling economic prosperity – why are audiences consumed with watching
frivolous conflicts and relationships from narcissistic individuals to pass the
time, consequently ‘dumbing down’ its audience?
One of the earliest forms of reality TV began in 1948 with
Allen Funt’s “Candid Camera” in America which the UK later adopted in 1960. Its
premise was a basic hidden camera prank show which confronted unbeknownst
members of the public with unusual scenarios in order to capture genuine
reactions. There have been various other reality shows since then but none
exploded in popularity until “Big Brother” hit the screens in 2000. It could be
said that this millennium mile-stone spurred a revitalisation in the reality TV
genre. Unlike the usual elements of the genre; “Big Brother”was marketed as a
social experimentgame show which enticed an audience interested in the
physiological aspect as well as voyeurs. However, over the years, the exhausted
concept has developed as a platform for fame-hungry individuals to get their
“fifteen minutes of fame.”[2]It has now turned into a
spectacle of eccentric and melodramatic characters living in a house with
producers concocting more extreme and unusual scenarios and tasks in order to
get more of a reaction. From this, it wouldsuggest that the television show
itself has ‘dumbed down’. Additionally, the popularity from the US hit TV show;
“The Hills” (2006) provided a mould for structured-reality to become a
mainstream genre. The simple concept of following the affluent lives of young people
living in Los Angeles gave audiences an insight into this remote and idealistic
lifestyle. This basic ‘winning formula’ may have been the inspiration the UK’s
answer to “The Hills” – “The Only Way is Essex” (“TOWIE”) which began in 2010.
The inauthenticity of structured reality television suggests
the superficial nature of its audiences and may further ‘dumb down’[3] its audience with its lack
of worthwhile content.The popularity of this television genre may be down to
the way its created – with audiences following the real lives of the characters
which have however been edited together to form a more compelling narrative. “Viewers
see less than an hour’s worth of footage”[4]which infers that
structured reality television is highly edited and only shows a snippet of
reality to maintain a fast-paced story line.“The highly contrived result is
filtered, packaged and marketed as reality”[5] which suggests that it’s
not reality at all. In series 7, Joey Essex and Mario Falcone have an argument.
[6]The use of camera shots
from various angles and proximities immerse the audience into the narrative.
For example, more close up shots of Joey Essex are used to highlight his anger.
Furthermore, at times, Lucy’s – Mario’s girlfriend –passivity is highlighted
through her close up reaction shots. However, this raises the issue of
authenticity, as this could be a reaction to another piece of the argument, not
necessarily the clip where it is shown. Although the footage is supposed to be
reality, the reality is moulded by producers to create a narrative, thus impacting
the truth of the programme. This may then lead to the questioning of our
societal values due to the “blurring of boundaries between real life and
entertainment.”[7]Producers of ‘The Only Way
is Essex’ exploit the ups and downs of Lydia Rose Bright and James ‘Arg’ Argent’s
relationship in order to create a narrative. In everyday life, this would be a
difficult situation to live in, but down to programmes like ‘TOWIE’, audiences
see it no different from a soapand highlights the “prioritisation of
entertainment over social commentary”.[8]Consequently, this suggests
that it’s ‘dumbing us down’ as we superficially watch this to serve our needs
and dismiss the physiological effects this would have on the protagonist of the
situation. This may be reiterated with Bauldrillard’s view that realty
television is a “widely acknowledged triumph of simulation and spectacle”.[9]This highlights how we overlookthe
exploitation of the characters and their scenarios and focus on the drama which
entices us.
The audience’s awareness of its inauthenticity suggests their
compliance inferring their ‘dumbed down’ nature. Producers need specific situations
and scenarios to film so “performances in scenes that have been planned by
professional storyline producers are very likely to include moments of
inauthenticity from at least some of the characters”[10]. This suggests mediation[11] is used to create a
story-line also connoting that the audience are aware of its inauthenticity but
still consider it as real life.In addition to this viewers may feel that they
can relate what they see on television to their own lives, this may be seen
negatively as they can relate to the superficial elements of ‘Made in Chelsea’,
such as their ‘socialite’ lifestyles, which suggests that the audiences dismiss
the need to have a stable, respectable jobthus attempt to identify with the
meaningless aspects of the lives they see on television. Another issue israised
from the institution as Tony Wood – creative director of Lime Pictures, the creators
of ‘TOWIE’ - said that “the question of authenticity was intended to be part of
the pleasure for viewers in the series”.[12]Wood’s statement connotes that
the institution canpre-occupythe audience by leaving thequestion of
authenticity to further entertain them which detracts from the worthless
content that they passively absorb. Furthermore, “the more people perform in front
of a camera, the less ‘real’ the programme is”[13] which creates a
paradoxical issue about how real reality is. Audiences become consumed in the
spectacle of the particular event in the programme. For instance in an episode
when Lydia Bright gets some bad news about Arg, multiple cameras are used to
film the same scene simultaneously[14]. By doing this they can
get a variety of shots to convey the narrative. To establish the scene a wide
shot is used, this not only tells us where they are but also who’s in the
scene. During this shot, it is also clear to the audience that the scene has
been mediated as the characters are all in close proximity with one another –
around a table. Dramatic irony is also used when Lydia is absent from the scene
when the characters finally reveal that Arg is cheating. This displays how
conventions from soap operas are used, reinforcing the idea that it is ‘fake’. Thisinfers
the audience is impressionable and passive by not questioning the issues about
the authenticity of the programme – we know it’s not a hundred per cent
authentic, so why do we continue to condone this and value it as worthwhile
television.
The popularity of reality television has introduced a new
type of celebrity who are more often than not seen as negative role models for
its audience. “The TOWIE generation is exposed to such a narrow field of women
in the public eye that they are harming their futures”[15] which infers that the
exposition of the materialistic and narcissistic females from‘TOWIE’ create negative
role models for young girls to follow – especially as female teenagers are
influenced with the world of celebrity. In turn,thissupresses valued
aspirations that they may have initially had – such as becoming doctors or
lawyers. As a result this also suggests that the younger generation are
becoming more closed-minded and don’t aspire beyond a superficial dream of
wealth. Furthermore, it could be said that “participants in the show have been
coerced into making a fool of themselves” [16]whichnot only links back
into the inauthenticity of structured reality but implies that these people
have been manipulated by producers to portray a certain character role to make
the narrative where Propp’s[17] character types can be
fulfilled. Moreover, Emma Kennedy says that; “Big Brother… has blasted out
living rooms with housemates like wannabe cluster bombs, leaving a trail of
irritating destruction in their wake”[18]connoting that these
people are only remembered due to their annoying behaviour rather than any good
that they have achieved. Audiences can also be easily influenced as Girlguiding
describes constructed programming as“hugely influential”[19] connoting that the institution
misleads audiencesas they believe the characters personasthey fulfil are real,
when in reality they are not as extreme. Audiences may be aspiring to be a
certain type of person that doesn’t really exist which may infer that they are
easily led and impressionable. This is reinforced as “programmes such as
Geordie Shore and The Only Way is Essex are a blueprint of how their lives
should look” which makes them want to mimic what they see. [20]Ultimately, the “role
model deficit” [21]has caused the ‘dumbing
down’ of audiences as it firstly infers that they are impressionable and
secondly suggests that the role models from “dramaility” television will influence
people to aspire to them and therefore, society and its audience will mirror
the “fake” reality the shows portray.
Furthermore, the popularity of structured reality
television suggests the ‘dumbing down’ of audiences as its superficial purpose
fulfils audience’s needs.The authenticity debate of this genre, the audience
acknowledge that the footage has been highly edited to create a continuing
narrative. This gives “viewers chance to
compare and contrast their own lives with those of the shows “protagonist”[22]
suggesting audiences watch this for “personal identity through performance”[23],
integration and social identity – Uses and Gratifications[24].This
can also be linked to the “cultivation theory”[25];
rather than seeing the serious issues that arise in society, the viewers may
only see the superficial elements and the smaller picture. Moreover, the
on-going story line creates a narrative hook which leaves the audience wanting
to find out more - “Many popular factual formats also contain other
storytelling techniques, such as strong characterisation, and/or serial
narratives in order to attract repeat viewers”[26]
which reinforces the notion that this show has a “very high degree of
hybridisation”. Additionally, enigma codes [27]are
used through a short montage of clips happening in the next episode of shows such
as ‘Made in Chelsea’ and ‘Geordie Shore’; this creates an enigmatic cliff
hanger which entices the audience into tuning in to the next episode. Structured
reality may also fulfil our needs – linking to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs such
as; belonging, esteem and self-actualisation. Nonetheless, these needs may have
superficial underlying elements and rather than helping us integrate with
society, it may fulfil the needs of “peeping Toms”[28]
who are interested and encouraged – by shows like ‘TOWIE’ and ‘Made in Chelsea’
– to look into the cast’s lives, judge and be entertained by ‘gossip’ from
these shows as if it were from actual people – such as their neighbours or
peers. This may raise the issue that we as viewers are not satisfied with the
reality of our own lives suggesting the triviality of society. This may also
suggest that audiences are voyeurs“or [have] peeping Tom syndrome [that] links
with the other two topics of harm and ‘dumbing down’ as voyeurism implies
watching reality TV is a form of socially deviant behaviour”[29].In
addition to this, connotations of “voyeurism” suggest a secret pleasure, this
reinforces the idea that Reality TV is a “guilty pleasure”. [30]Structured
reality has also been described as a “choreographed illusion that celebrates distasteful and
dysfunctional behaviour, feeds our voyeuristic urges”[31]which suggests that this genre of television portrays
the low-brow aspects of lifewhich audiences deem it as entertainment and as a
result “siphons intelligence”[32]. Furthermore, a key purpose of “dramality” television
is for audience escapism as it “provides a cultural space where contemporary
anxieties are played out within a dramatic structure and in an entertaining
format”[33].
This allows audiences to think about someone else’s problems other that their
own and become preoccupied with the humorous and light-heartedness aspects of
the show
The cost-effectiveness of structured reality TV
makes it attractive for institutions to fill their schedules with; this results
in the lack of traditional worthwhile television. Structured
reality ‘docusoaps’ can be produced “three times as cheaply as comparable light
entertainment”[34] says
Hamann, head of BBC documentary features,
which is effective as institutions try to
keep costs down due to the wavering economic climate. After the successes of
‘TOWIE’ and ‘Made in Chelsea’ their creators recently held auditions for a show
with a very similar concept to be based in Coventry. This shows that institutions
have aimed to use this successful formula to replicate the success and possibly
have another show to fill up the TV schedule with more trivial but more cost-effective
television shows. This infers that television is now determined by the economy
which reinforces the idea that “reality programming is so popular it has
changed the economics of the television industry”[35].
Furthermore, “as long as we are still fascinated by other humans and there is a
profit to be made, programmes like Made in Chelsea will exist, and people will
watch”[36]suggesting
there will always be a market for reality television and due to this,
institutions will continue to produce them as it is an effective way of
producing cheap television.
Nonetheless, a less common reading of structured reality and
‘TOWIE’may imply that reality television gives audiences a motive to aspire
towards.The stereotypical term of the “Essex man and women” became popularised
in the 1900’s – conveying a negative stereotype of the superficial and
loud-mouthed working class. Thisinfluences the producers to fulfil this
stereotype – by casting people such as Mark Wright and Amy Childs who reiterate
this and reinforce Propp's[37] character types theory. However,
beyond this superficial stereotype, the term was coined help explain the
electoral success of Margret Thatcher as she opened up free-markets and allowed
the working class to defer wealth away from the tradition middle-classes. This
further reading of the stereotype – and possibly derogatory term - may suggest
that Essex is the epitome of an active democratic society for the working class
and highlights an underlying positive interpretation which delves below the
superficial façade and bravado. In addition to this, Essex is one of the most
affluent areas in Southern England – with Brentwood being the 19th
richest town in the UK – and consisting of a large middle class - a similar
thing could be said with the setting of Chelsea in ‘Made in Chelsea’ as it’s
synonymous for wealth and aristocracy. The common theme of wealth in these
programmes may link to popularity of them. The excessive and attractive
lifestyles may inspireviewers to attempt to identify with them which may then
go against the notion that structured reality sets a bad example as people may
be aiming to aspire to gain wealth and live a similar lifestyle. This therefore
shows that structured reality may be creating an aspirational culture which may
absolve certain people from a lower social status and re-create the notion of
‘rags to ritches’.
To conclude, although we may dismiss the reading that
“dramality” television may make us an aspirational society, it is more accurate
to say that it is ultimately indicative of “dumbing down” its audience. A
primary reason for this is due to the superficial nature and origins of the
programme, which suggests that audiences are fulfilled and satisfied by its
triviality and thus causes it to be increasingly popular. This argument is
reinforced by that fact that is produces a lack of positive role models, it’s
substance is a purposeless genre of television and the fact that it’shighly addictive
steers people away from watching educational or more worthwhile programmes.“Whether we like it or not, reality TV is a
powerful genre” and it is to a large extent that
structured reality television is indicative of the ‘dumbing down’ of its
audiences. Reality television will continue to grow and manifest into different
formats which suggests that this genre is the only way for television to head.
[2]
15 Minutes of Fame, pg2
[4]CLCWeb
Volume 7 Issue 2 (June 2005) Article 5
[5]ibid
[7]CLCWeb
Volume 7 Issue 2 (June 2005) Article 5
[8]
The Television Genre Book, Pg 139
[9] ibid, pg 136
[10]An Introduction to Television Studies,
pg 139
[11]
Reading Television Pg 129
[12]An
Introduction to Television Studies, pg 139
[13]Reality Tv: Audiences and popular factual television,
pg 176
[14]
The Only Way is Essex, Series 2 2010
[15]Girlguiding
UK McGuinness R. (2012).
[16]Reality Tv: Audiences and popular factual television, 2005, pg
70
[18]
Shouting at the Telly Pg 189
[19]Bafta
Introduces New ‘Constructed Reality’ Award. [Internet].
[20]Girlguiding
UK McGuinness R. (2012).
[21]ibid
[22]CLCWeb
Volume 7 Issue 2 (June 2005) Article 5, J.
Morreale
[23]ibid
[24]Reading
Television, pg 53
[26]Reality
Tv: Audiences and popular factual television, pg 52
[27]Practising
Theory and Reading Literature, pg 119
[28]
Playing on the Periphery, Pg 90
[29]Reality
TV: Audiences and popular Factual Television, pg 84
[30]
The Triumph of Reality TV, pg 3
[32]
ibid
[33]Reality Tv: Audiences and popular factual television 2002, pg
84
[34]The
Television Genre Book, Pg 139
[35]Reality Tv: Audiences and popular factual television, pg 6
