http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/28/big-brother-reality-simon-cowell
The genre is more dominant than ever and has made extraordinary incursions into reality, as in the place we all live.
Marina Hyde guardian.co.uk, Friday 28 August 2009 22.00 BST Article historyThe demise of Big Brother resembled the funeral of a much-loathed relative, at which no one really knows what to say. At weddings, there's always "you must be very proud", but when you simply can't trust yourself to deliver "he'll be sorely missed" convincingly, the risk of blunder looms large. And so it was with Channel 4's rich-but-racist uncle of a show, where the uncertain tribute that occurred with most embarrassing frequency in the obituaries was: "Is this the beginning of the end for reality TV?"
The most gauche of inquiries, unless it was deliberately designed to join the annals of majestic Daily Mail headlines to which the answer is always no (see "Are we being run by a lesbian mafia?", "Is this the face of Christ?", "Are giant squids invading the UK?"). Far from signalling decline, Big Brother's passing marks the coming of age of reality TV, and more specifically its audience. Not in a good way, obviously – it's all exactly as predicted in the Book of Revelation – but rest assured, the genre has much bigger brothers to fry.
For all its initial technical innovation, Big Brother had looked terminally unsophisticated for a while. If people wanted to watch adults dressing up and play silly games, there was CBeebies. Even the manner of its departing reflected the show's debilitating tameness. It wasn't axed, it was simply "not renewed", in the manner of a road tax disc or membership of Worthing library.
Yet reality TV is more dominant than ever, providing both the BBC and ITV with their season tent poles. Phone voting thrives, despite the scandals. At America's Fox network, evil genius president of alternative programming Mike Darnell continues to spew out Octomom specials and current hits like More to Love, wherein plus-sized contestants look for love, the better to reflect back to themselves the obese neophiles he believes make up his audience.
But most significantly, Reality, as in the genre, has made extraordinary incursions into reality, as in the place we all live (with a few notable exceptions like moat-encircled Douglas Hogg MP and Trudie Styler). Indeed, there has been such a weird shift in relations between these two notional spaces over the last few years that people have continually suggested that reality needs to borrow the clothes of Reality in order to exercise any kind of hold on the popular imagination.
Back in the 1890s, Oscar Wilde remarked that the increased prevalence of London fogs was entirely down to the Impressionist painters, and that sunsets were beginning to imitate Turner's paintings. Life, he opined, was a failure from the artistic point of view, and so it has often seemed in the age of real life programming. A few years ago it was vogueish to sigh that more young people voted in Big Brother than did in general elections. It wasn't true, of course, but had the much more important ring of truth, and so it was that Simon Cowell began to be touted as the man to revitalise politics. Naturally, Simon is busy – too busy to accept a recent invitation to meet with Barack Obama – but a few months ago he gave an interview in which he declared he wanted "to give politics the X Factor".
Think he couldn't do it? If only Simon shared your doubt. Consider Afghan Star, the Kabul-based imitation of American Idol. "The fact we're allowing the public to make the decisions most of the time is a really good thing," Cowell mused of the format. "The great thing is when you start seeing it in places like China and Afghanistan. It's democracy. We've kinda given democracy back to the world." Liberation via pitchy R&B vocal: a worthy successor to the shock and awe doctrine.
We might well be raising an entire generation who will not understand anything unless it is presented as a three-judge talent show, but it is an odd paradox that such stagey artifice should be the most popular way to make something feel real. Similarly, there is a reason young people are given to sexting and filming themselves having sex and all those other modern pursuits many of us are far too ancient to fathom – and it is not that they have discovered the erotic potential of crappy camera phone lighting. They don't appear to regard sex as having happened unless it has been committed to a format which makes it easily distributable to a feedback-giving audience.
Elsewhere, the blurring of the boundaries between Reality and reality feels even more sinister. In a previous column about surveillance culture, I mentioned that the Shoreditch Trust trialled a scheme in which residents of two rundown estates were given access to live CCTV footage of their communal areas, and were encouraged to watch them to assist policing. This week, the author James Harkin noted that the council's report on the trial had found that "viewing figures for the scheme were as good as that for primetime, weekday broadcast television".
So it's fair to say the Big Brother legacy lives on. Sure, we've seen the heyday of cloistering fairly attractive people in McMansions. But just as the early makeover shows eventually became surgical makeoever shows, so the format has given way to real Big Brother, while year nine are gripped by your daughter's fellatio technique, and the Idol franchise is taking credit for overthrowing the Taliban. If anything could make you nostalgic for Davina and friends, it's Reality 2.0.
Monday 7 February 2011
Wednesday 2 February 2011
First Draft
How are reality TV shows such as Wife Swap and Supernanny constructed? Why is this genre so popular? (I changed my question a little bit)
The world of reality TV has dominated our screens and the attention of its viewers for over 10 years. The deregulation of terrestrial television meant the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Five weren’t the only broadcasting providers of information and entertainment, as cable introduced a range of niche channels with niche topics, putting terrestrial channels in danger of losing its mainstream audience. Therefore terrestrial TV had to provide something new; “cheap alternative to drama” . This alternative became “Reality TV”, a factual based genre with high entertainment values. It requires no actors, no scripts and no expensive settings which lead to an increase of a wide range of reality TV shows for a range of audiences.
The Reality genre is hard to define, but is best described as a “ mix of fact and fiction, of popular elements of documentary or news, popular elements of lifestyle or talk shows and drama like melodrama or soap opera." Though reality mixes a range of TV genres, it is successful and popular because of its “entertainment orientation", and seeing people respond in voyeuristic ways. It aims to represent and reflect real people, their real lives and real emotions, but when studying the genre, it becomes clear that this reality is somewhat constructed and mediated in many different ways.
This essay explores the construction and success of the genre with a particular focus on, self improvement Fly-on-the-Wall documentaries, Wife Swap and Supernanny. They are slightly different to the typical reality game shows such as the X Factor and Britain’s Got Talent that dominate our screens, yet they are still very popular as they provide a good balance of entertainment and information, which put them in the contemporary media landscape. An exploration of narrative techniques and conventions are used to construct reality in Wife Swap and Supernanny, and why the genre has become so popular with audiences and dominates out TV screens.
Firstly Reality TV shows are constructed using the codes and conventions of fly on the wall documentary to represent reality, as it is a well regarded factual genre. “Television's first reality show” was the fly on the wall An American Family (Craig Gilbert, USA, 1972), which followed the "experience of a nuclear family”ibid and was 12 episodes edited from “300 hours of footage”ibid. The household setting and highlights of a long process in chronological order are some of the conventions of documentary adopted by the reality genre. This is seen in Wife Swap; a two week event, with two families, is edited into an hour of highlights. In particular, Series 7 episode 1 of Wife Swap: The Ahmeds and Escotts, uses many documentary conventions such as the humorous voice over, interviews with the show’s participants and sound bridging to add to the feel of a documentary. The most noticeable convention is the hand held camera providing voyeuristic elements to the show and this is one of the elements that make reality TV as popular as it highlights society’s love of viewing and prying in others lives in our "open society" .
Not only do reality TV shows adopt conventions of documentary, but it mixes with mainstream popular entertainment and fresh, original ideas, making it extremely popular. This led to An American Family (Craig Gilbert, USA, 1972) being labelled an “exceptional program that broke the rules of television production” and its format has inspired newer shows, including BBC’s The Family (1974) and revamped for Channel 4’s recent version. Similarly, Supernanny provides information for the audience, on dealing with children, yet the arguably adopts comic elements, from family and life struggles faced in sitcoms to provide entertainment. However, modern critics argue the use of documentary for mainstream entertainment is damaging to society as it attempts to replace “the more serious and challenging forms of documentary with so much lightweight, undemanding pap" …
Though the genre of the show supposedly represents reality, the institutions involved in the text construct it to fit their own ideologies. Wife Swap and Supernanny are broadcasted by Channel 4; a Public Service Broadcaster that aims to entertain, inform and educate. These ideologies are clearly reflected in Supernanny and Wife Swap’s entertaining yet informative nature. However, some institutions implicitly reflect their ideologies though means of mediation and this applied to both Supernanny and Wife Swap.
Firstly, institutions are looking for “a special kind of performance ability”ibid.13 for their show to provide a constructed show full of entertainment, and this process begins with the selection of characters. The institution involved in Supernanny select families with extremely naughty kids and stressed out parents, to create dramatic conflict, which provides entertainment. Propps theory could argue that the children selected for the show are Proppian villains, and the parents, particularly the mothers, are the passive princesses that need to be saved from their children’s destructive behaviour. In series 2, episode 1, The Collins Family, the children are referred to as the “mob” and “gang” by the male voice over. This stereotypes the children and could be interpreted as the future generation of young criminals that are negatively stereotyped in the media. Though this looks at delicate issues, audiences would “trust that people have been treated fairly”, however, the authoritative male voice over presents these exaggerated representations as the truth. This construction of the truth is further mediated, with the use of the Supernanny, Jo, who is female but interestingly is the powerful and dominant heroine. Her forceful entrance to a family home, her disruption and later resolution could be interpreted as the ideologies of the institution; the powerful and elite always win the battle, hence the positive new equilibrium at the end of every episode.
Secondly, institutions use editing to reflect the constructed conflict in their shows, which provides entertainment and suggest the popularity of the show. Wife Swap selects contrasting characters such as “moderns” swapping with “ traditionals, urbans with rurals.”ibid The editing reflects this binary opposition of characters through the use of paralleling the families’ wife swapping experience, which a “basic prerequisite; no friction, no show”ibid. Interesting, it has been suggested that “the mainstream media” ibid owners attempt to “encourage life choices”ibid that are in their interest, by siding with a particular families’ values that reflect their hegemonic values. In Series 7, episode 1, it is clear that the expressive, free and independent thinking Escotts family are favoured by the text compared to the very religious and traditionalist Ahmed family. The prominent scene where the Ahmed wife seemingly interrogates the sexuality of lesbian daughter, Becky, represents the wife as a cruel villain disrespecting a teenager, who represents the free-willed person of society. This is linked to the theory of hegemony because the “dominant classes”ibid - being the institution- “persuade subordinate or lower ones to accept and adopt their values.”ibid Therefore, the institutions present their hegemonic ideologies and provide entertainment though the parallel editing of binary oppositional contestants, to create conflict.
"Reality TV couldn’t be the success story it is if it didn’t appeal to lots of different kinds of audiences” .The genre is so popular because it has a wide audience yet is able to appeal to individuals on a personal level and therefore suggests why it’s so successful. Wife Swap is targeted at 16-45 year olds with a wider audience of 14-60 year olds. Interestingly, the show has the capability to appeal to all of the 4C’s as the show represents theses people through their lifestyle and values which audiences can identify with and support. For example the Ahmed’s are a resigned family as they stick to historical and cultural traditions, while the Escotts are Reformers, independent with their individual values. Not only does it appeal to a wide range of 4Cs but a wide range of ethnicities as they want to see how they are represented in the show. It is this wide appeal that suggests the popularity of the show.
The range of narrative pleasure and gratifications that come from reality TV also suggest why it is so popular amongst audiences. Though Supernanny has a household setting, it is arguably targeted at a female, mother audiences, as they can gain information about childcare from the show, in terms of the Uses and Gratifications theory. Other narrative pleasures include the happy ending, which is very common and almost an audience expectation in the self improvement reality genre. In Supernanny, the show begins with equilibrium of extremely naughty kids with defenceless parents and the arrival of Jo is the disequilibrium causing the disruption to the family. The new equilibrium would be Jo restoring balance of power within a family, common in the ‘self-improvement’ reality genre. This brings about ideologies of authority, power and hegemonic values from the institution. In terms of the uses and gratifications theory, escapism allows audiences to voyeuristically interact with two other home and family lives, to see how they live in the comfort of their own home. In Wife Swap, the entertainment is provided when audiences see how the wife’s and new families struggle to get along with each other or settling into the new rules. The ways in which families respond to the Wife Swapping situation allows audiences to identify with the families as well as identifying their own faults and possible improvements in their own lives: this becomes the information and learning element of the uses and gratifications theory. This wide range of audience pleasure highlights how active audiences are, as well as suggesting why the reality genre is so popular.
The genre is also popular because it reflects society and its current issues, making it relative and identifiable to a range of audiences. Both Wife Swap and Supernanny deal with “family breakdown, or the ‘broken Britain’ theme ”. These programmes are set in very private and internal spaces, which are broadcasted on national television which reflects many elements of our society. In particular, both shows have invasive characters, whether it’s dominant Jo in Supernanny or Wife Swap’s wives invading the personal lives and values of other families, they reflect our open society -‘nothing is sacred’ philosophy" - our voyeuristic nature and scopophilic pleasures, “the pleasure of watching” someone in their own lives, in the comfort of the audiences' home. It also gives audiences a chance to see an aspect of others lives, that might not be identifiable to their own, giving them a possible representation of our society. This shows the importance of reality TV audiences to trust and have faith in the texts they are watching, to gain information about the society they live in. However, if the programme makers exploit participants of Supernanny and Wife Swap, this could be argued as tokenism and stereotyping that only reflects a small part of society and therefore an unjust representation of our whole society, which is very misleading. Though it is arguable that programme makers exploit participants, the shows created aim to reflect an identifiable society audiences live in, which suggests its popularity.
Both Wife Swap and Supernanny also have an informative nature and aim to deal and fix some of the moral panics within society, which could suggest why it is so successful as audiences believe in its power as a media text. Reality brings up “a moral issue and make people confront it” and take a view point. For example Wife Swap linked to the concern of failed marriages in the UK and Supernanny linked to the great concern in the bad behaviour of young people. “Whether it resolves the issue for people is another matter"ibid, as these stereotypes and representations are constantly shown, it could have a cultivating effect on society and therefore is contributing to these moral panics rather than resolving them.
Reality TV is constructed in the documentary format to reflect its representations of the truth and reality. It has to reflect itself in this way because institutions mediate them to reflect their own ideologies such as hegemony, authority and high entertainment. Its ability to appeal to wide audiences makes it popular, as it reflects their society and them as individual people. Though there is great success made from the reality TV genre, there are other ideas about its negative impact on the status of the media industry and society. Many critics believe “the rush to deliver more and more” reality shows means the “standards will not be maintained”ibid or that it appeals to “stupid people” , making the respectability of TV go down. However, its “experimental nature”ibid that mixes popular genres makes it successful as it takes “things you like in other shows.” ibid Though its easy to say how institutions are manipulating reality shows to reflect their own ideologies, we must consider that audiences are becoming more active in their viewing, there is a “heightened general awareness of fakery” in reality shows, and has this affected the reputation of “more serious, kinds of documentary” ibid that it adopts from? To have an idea where reality TV’s success will lead into the future, is by looking at successful genres from the past. Docu-soaps were popular and very successful in the mid 90’s with shows like “Airport, Driving School and Vets in Practice” , but the “veritable feeding frenzy among programme makers” ibid led to an explosion of the genre where audience just got fed up. Could this mean reality TV has the same fate?
2,213 word count
Works Cited
Books
1. Kilborn, R. W.. Staging the real: factual TV programming in the age of Big Brother. Manchester: Manchester University Press ;, 2003. Print.
Newspapers and magazines
2. Dixon, Tina. "Reality TV: What's happening?." Media Magazine Dec. 2004: n. pag. Reality TV: What's happening?. Web. 6 Nov. 2010.
3. Grahame, Jenny. "Reality TV: an interview with Annette Hill." Media Magazine Dec. 2009: n. pag. Reality TV: an interview with Annette Hill. Web. 6 Nov. 2010.
4. Scott-Galloway , Lucy. "The Constructed World of Wife Swap." Media Magazine Apr. 2005: n. pag. The Constructed World of Wife Swap. Web. 6 Nov. 2010.
Internet
5. "AN AMERICAN FAMILY: THE STORY OF THE LOUDS (1973)." SUBTERRANEAN CINEMA. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Dec. 2010..
6. Sparks, Collin. "International Socialism: Reality TV: the Big Brother phenomenon." International Socialism. N.p., 9 Apr. 2007. Web. 26 Oct. 2010..
Moving Image texts
7. "Series 7, Episode 1, The Ahmeds and the Escotts." Lambert , Stephen. Wife Swap. Channel 4. 27 Feb. 2009. Television.
8. "Series 2, Episode 1, The Collins Family." Ricochet, and Outline. Supernanny. Channel 4. 12 June 2009. Television.
Works Consulted
9. Butler, Jeremy G.. Television critical methods and applications. 2nd ed. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum, 2002. Print.
10. Casey, Bernadette. Television studies: the key concepts. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.
11. Creeber, Glen. Tele-visions: An Introduction to Studying Television.. London: British Film Institute, 2006. Print.
12. "Frederick Wiseman's TITICUT FOLLIES (1969)." SUBTERRANEAN CINEMA. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Dec. 2010..
13. Hill, Annette. Reality TV: audiences and popular factual television. London: Routledge, 2005. Print.
14. Hill, Annette. Restyling factual TV: audiences and news, documentary and reality genres. London: Routledge, 2007. Print.
15. Holmes, Su., and Deborah Jermyn. Understanding reality television . London: Routledge, 2004. Print.
16. Murray, Susan, and Laurie Ouellette. Reality TV: remaking television culture. New York: New York University Press, 2004. Print.
17. NEWREVIEWQUEEN, and Taylott. "Come Dine With Me Reviews Reality TV Shows Review Centre." Consumer Reviews, Product Ratings, Compare Best Prices Review Centre. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.. These are reviews of Come Dine With Me, for me to see what makes reality TV so popular amongst audiences.
18. Orlebar, Jeremy. "MediaEdu - Resources - An Introduction to Documentary." MediaEdu - Resources. N.p., 26 Apr. 2010. Web. 28 Dec. 2010..
19. Richardson, Sean. "Reality TV and Theory, What can philosophy teach us about reality TV?." Media Magazine Dec. 2007: n. pag. What can philosophy teach us about reality TV?. Web. 6 Nov. 2010.
20. Sieder, Joe. "BFI Screenonline: Police (1982)." BFI Screenonline. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Dec. 2010..
21. "TV family mediation series need separated couples with kids - StarNow.co.uk." StarNow.co.uk - Acting Auditions, Model Agency Casting, Music Jobs, Dance jobs, Modelling Agencies & Photography jobs. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Oct. 2010..
22. Taddeo, Julie Anne, and Ken Dvorak. The tube has spoken: reality TV & history. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2010. Print.
23. Walden , Viki. "Factual Programming." Media Edu. N.p., 12 May 2009. Web. 1 Jan. 2011..
The world of reality TV has dominated our screens and the attention of its viewers for over 10 years. The deregulation of terrestrial television meant the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Five weren’t the only broadcasting providers of information and entertainment, as cable introduced a range of niche channels with niche topics, putting terrestrial channels in danger of losing its mainstream audience. Therefore terrestrial TV had to provide something new; “cheap alternative to drama” . This alternative became “Reality TV”, a factual based genre with high entertainment values. It requires no actors, no scripts and no expensive settings which lead to an increase of a wide range of reality TV shows for a range of audiences.
The Reality genre is hard to define, but is best described as a “ mix of fact and fiction, of popular elements of documentary or news, popular elements of lifestyle or talk shows and drama like melodrama or soap opera." Though reality mixes a range of TV genres, it is successful and popular because of its “entertainment orientation", and seeing people respond in voyeuristic ways. It aims to represent and reflect real people, their real lives and real emotions, but when studying the genre, it becomes clear that this reality is somewhat constructed and mediated in many different ways.
This essay explores the construction and success of the genre with a particular focus on, self improvement Fly-on-the-Wall documentaries, Wife Swap and Supernanny. They are slightly different to the typical reality game shows such as the X Factor and Britain’s Got Talent that dominate our screens, yet they are still very popular as they provide a good balance of entertainment and information, which put them in the contemporary media landscape. An exploration of narrative techniques and conventions are used to construct reality in Wife Swap and Supernanny, and why the genre has become so popular with audiences and dominates out TV screens.
Firstly Reality TV shows are constructed using the codes and conventions of fly on the wall documentary to represent reality, as it is a well regarded factual genre. “Television's first reality show” was the fly on the wall An American Family (Craig Gilbert, USA, 1972), which followed the "experience of a nuclear family”ibid and was 12 episodes edited from “300 hours of footage”ibid. The household setting and highlights of a long process in chronological order are some of the conventions of documentary adopted by the reality genre. This is seen in Wife Swap; a two week event, with two families, is edited into an hour of highlights. In particular, Series 7 episode 1 of Wife Swap: The Ahmeds and Escotts, uses many documentary conventions such as the humorous voice over, interviews with the show’s participants and sound bridging to add to the feel of a documentary. The most noticeable convention is the hand held camera providing voyeuristic elements to the show and this is one of the elements that make reality TV as popular as it highlights society’s love of viewing and prying in others lives in our "open society" .
Not only do reality TV shows adopt conventions of documentary, but it mixes with mainstream popular entertainment and fresh, original ideas, making it extremely popular. This led to An American Family (Craig Gilbert, USA, 1972) being labelled an “exceptional program that broke the rules of television production” and its format has inspired newer shows, including BBC’s The Family (1974) and revamped for Channel 4’s recent version. Similarly, Supernanny provides information for the audience, on dealing with children, yet the arguably adopts comic elements, from family and life struggles faced in sitcoms to provide entertainment. However, modern critics argue the use of documentary for mainstream entertainment is damaging to society as it attempts to replace “the more serious and challenging forms of documentary with so much lightweight, undemanding pap" …
Though the genre of the show supposedly represents reality, the institutions involved in the text construct it to fit their own ideologies. Wife Swap and Supernanny are broadcasted by Channel 4; a Public Service Broadcaster that aims to entertain, inform and educate. These ideologies are clearly reflected in Supernanny and Wife Swap’s entertaining yet informative nature. However, some institutions implicitly reflect their ideologies though means of mediation and this applied to both Supernanny and Wife Swap.
Firstly, institutions are looking for “a special kind of performance ability”ibid.13 for their show to provide a constructed show full of entertainment, and this process begins with the selection of characters. The institution involved in Supernanny select families with extremely naughty kids and stressed out parents, to create dramatic conflict, which provides entertainment. Propps theory could argue that the children selected for the show are Proppian villains, and the parents, particularly the mothers, are the passive princesses that need to be saved from their children’s destructive behaviour. In series 2, episode 1, The Collins Family, the children are referred to as the “mob” and “gang” by the male voice over. This stereotypes the children and could be interpreted as the future generation of young criminals that are negatively stereotyped in the media. Though this looks at delicate issues, audiences would “trust that people have been treated fairly”, however, the authoritative male voice over presents these exaggerated representations as the truth. This construction of the truth is further mediated, with the use of the Supernanny, Jo, who is female but interestingly is the powerful and dominant heroine. Her forceful entrance to a family home, her disruption and later resolution could be interpreted as the ideologies of the institution; the powerful and elite always win the battle, hence the positive new equilibrium at the end of every episode.
Secondly, institutions use editing to reflect the constructed conflict in their shows, which provides entertainment and suggest the popularity of the show. Wife Swap selects contrasting characters such as “moderns” swapping with “ traditionals, urbans with rurals.”ibid The editing reflects this binary opposition of characters through the use of paralleling the families’ wife swapping experience, which a “basic prerequisite; no friction, no show”ibid. Interesting, it has been suggested that “the mainstream media” ibid owners attempt to “encourage life choices”ibid that are in their interest, by siding with a particular families’ values that reflect their hegemonic values. In Series 7, episode 1, it is clear that the expressive, free and independent thinking Escotts family are favoured by the text compared to the very religious and traditionalist Ahmed family. The prominent scene where the Ahmed wife seemingly interrogates the sexuality of lesbian daughter, Becky, represents the wife as a cruel villain disrespecting a teenager, who represents the free-willed person of society. This is linked to the theory of hegemony because the “dominant classes”ibid - being the institution- “persuade subordinate or lower ones to accept and adopt their values.”ibid Therefore, the institutions present their hegemonic ideologies and provide entertainment though the parallel editing of binary oppositional contestants, to create conflict.
"Reality TV couldn’t be the success story it is if it didn’t appeal to lots of different kinds of audiences” .The genre is so popular because it has a wide audience yet is able to appeal to individuals on a personal level and therefore suggests why it’s so successful. Wife Swap is targeted at 16-45 year olds with a wider audience of 14-60 year olds. Interestingly, the show has the capability to appeal to all of the 4C’s as the show represents theses people through their lifestyle and values which audiences can identify with and support. For example the Ahmed’s are a resigned family as they stick to historical and cultural traditions, while the Escotts are Reformers, independent with their individual values. Not only does it appeal to a wide range of 4Cs but a wide range of ethnicities as they want to see how they are represented in the show. It is this wide appeal that suggests the popularity of the show.
The range of narrative pleasure and gratifications that come from reality TV also suggest why it is so popular amongst audiences. Though Supernanny has a household setting, it is arguably targeted at a female, mother audiences, as they can gain information about childcare from the show, in terms of the Uses and Gratifications theory. Other narrative pleasures include the happy ending, which is very common and almost an audience expectation in the self improvement reality genre. In Supernanny, the show begins with equilibrium of extremely naughty kids with defenceless parents and the arrival of Jo is the disequilibrium causing the disruption to the family. The new equilibrium would be Jo restoring balance of power within a family, common in the ‘self-improvement’ reality genre. This brings about ideologies of authority, power and hegemonic values from the institution. In terms of the uses and gratifications theory, escapism allows audiences to voyeuristically interact with two other home and family lives, to see how they live in the comfort of their own home. In Wife Swap, the entertainment is provided when audiences see how the wife’s and new families struggle to get along with each other or settling into the new rules. The ways in which families respond to the Wife Swapping situation allows audiences to identify with the families as well as identifying their own faults and possible improvements in their own lives: this becomes the information and learning element of the uses and gratifications theory. This wide range of audience pleasure highlights how active audiences are, as well as suggesting why the reality genre is so popular.
The genre is also popular because it reflects society and its current issues, making it relative and identifiable to a range of audiences. Both Wife Swap and Supernanny deal with “family breakdown, or the ‘broken Britain’ theme ”. These programmes are set in very private and internal spaces, which are broadcasted on national television which reflects many elements of our society. In particular, both shows have invasive characters, whether it’s dominant Jo in Supernanny or Wife Swap’s wives invading the personal lives and values of other families, they reflect our open society -‘nothing is sacred’ philosophy" - our voyeuristic nature and scopophilic pleasures, “the pleasure of watching” someone in their own lives, in the comfort of the audiences' home. It also gives audiences a chance to see an aspect of others lives, that might not be identifiable to their own, giving them a possible representation of our society. This shows the importance of reality TV audiences to trust and have faith in the texts they are watching, to gain information about the society they live in. However, if the programme makers exploit participants of Supernanny and Wife Swap, this could be argued as tokenism and stereotyping that only reflects a small part of society and therefore an unjust representation of our whole society, which is very misleading. Though it is arguable that programme makers exploit participants, the shows created aim to reflect an identifiable society audiences live in, which suggests its popularity.
Both Wife Swap and Supernanny also have an informative nature and aim to deal and fix some of the moral panics within society, which could suggest why it is so successful as audiences believe in its power as a media text. Reality brings up “a moral issue and make people confront it” and take a view point. For example Wife Swap linked to the concern of failed marriages in the UK and Supernanny linked to the great concern in the bad behaviour of young people. “Whether it resolves the issue for people is another matter"ibid, as these stereotypes and representations are constantly shown, it could have a cultivating effect on society and therefore is contributing to these moral panics rather than resolving them.
Reality TV is constructed in the documentary format to reflect its representations of the truth and reality. It has to reflect itself in this way because institutions mediate them to reflect their own ideologies such as hegemony, authority and high entertainment. Its ability to appeal to wide audiences makes it popular, as it reflects their society and them as individual people. Though there is great success made from the reality TV genre, there are other ideas about its negative impact on the status of the media industry and society. Many critics believe “the rush to deliver more and more” reality shows means the “standards will not be maintained”ibid or that it appeals to “stupid people” , making the respectability of TV go down. However, its “experimental nature”ibid that mixes popular genres makes it successful as it takes “things you like in other shows.” ibid Though its easy to say how institutions are manipulating reality shows to reflect their own ideologies, we must consider that audiences are becoming more active in their viewing, there is a “heightened general awareness of fakery” in reality shows, and has this affected the reputation of “more serious, kinds of documentary” ibid that it adopts from? To have an idea where reality TV’s success will lead into the future, is by looking at successful genres from the past. Docu-soaps were popular and very successful in the mid 90’s with shows like “Airport, Driving School and Vets in Practice” , but the “veritable feeding frenzy among programme makers” ibid led to an explosion of the genre where audience just got fed up. Could this mean reality TV has the same fate?
2,213 word count
Works Cited
Books
1. Kilborn, R. W.. Staging the real: factual TV programming in the age of Big Brother. Manchester: Manchester University Press ;, 2003. Print.
Newspapers and magazines
2. Dixon, Tina. "Reality TV: What's happening?." Media Magazine Dec. 2004: n. pag. Reality TV: What's happening?. Web. 6 Nov. 2010.
3. Grahame, Jenny. "Reality TV: an interview with Annette Hill." Media Magazine Dec. 2009: n. pag. Reality TV: an interview with Annette Hill. Web. 6 Nov. 2010.
4. Scott-Galloway , Lucy. "The Constructed World of Wife Swap." Media Magazine Apr. 2005: n. pag. The Constructed World of Wife Swap. Web. 6 Nov. 2010.
Internet
5. "AN AMERICAN FAMILY: THE STORY OF THE LOUDS (1973)." SUBTERRANEAN CINEMA. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Dec. 2010.
6. Sparks, Collin. "International Socialism: Reality TV: the Big Brother phenomenon." International Socialism. N.p., 9 Apr. 2007. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.
Moving Image texts
7. "Series 7, Episode 1, The Ahmeds and the Escotts." Lambert , Stephen. Wife Swap. Channel 4. 27 Feb. 2009. Television.
8. "Series 2, Episode 1, The Collins Family." Ricochet, and Outline. Supernanny. Channel 4. 12 June 2009. Television.
Works Consulted
9. Butler, Jeremy G.. Television critical methods and applications. 2nd ed. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum, 2002. Print.
10. Casey, Bernadette. Television studies: the key concepts. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.
11. Creeber, Glen. Tele-visions: An Introduction to Studying Television.. London: British Film Institute, 2006. Print.
12. "Frederick Wiseman's TITICUT FOLLIES (1969)." SUBTERRANEAN CINEMA. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Dec. 2010.
13. Hill, Annette. Reality TV: audiences and popular factual television. London: Routledge, 2005. Print.
14. Hill, Annette. Restyling factual TV: audiences and news, documentary and reality genres. London: Routledge, 2007. Print.
15. Holmes, Su., and Deborah Jermyn. Understanding reality television . London: Routledge, 2004. Print.
16. Murray, Susan, and Laurie Ouellette. Reality TV: remaking television culture. New York: New York University Press, 2004. Print.
17. NEWREVIEWQUEEN, and Taylott. "Come Dine With Me Reviews Reality TV Shows Review Centre." Consumer Reviews, Product Ratings, Compare Best Prices Review Centre. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.
18. Orlebar, Jeremy. "MediaEdu - Resources - An Introduction to Documentary." MediaEdu - Resources. N.p., 26 Apr. 2010. Web. 28 Dec. 2010.
19. Richardson, Sean. "Reality TV and Theory, What can philosophy teach us about reality TV?." Media Magazine Dec. 2007: n. pag. What can philosophy teach us about reality TV?. Web. 6 Nov. 2010.
20. Sieder, Joe. "BFI Screenonline: Police (1982)." BFI Screenonline. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Dec. 2010.
21. "TV family mediation series need separated couples with kids - StarNow.co.uk." StarNow.co.uk - Acting Auditions, Model Agency Casting, Music Jobs, Dance jobs, Modelling Agencies & Photography jobs. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.
22. Taddeo, Julie Anne, and Ken Dvorak. The tube has spoken: reality TV & history. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2010. Print.
23. Walden , Viki. "Factual Programming." Media Edu. N.p., 12 May 2009. Web. 1 Jan. 2011.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)