Reality TV: Good or Bad?

For me it's a waste of good time slots. ;)

Big Brother was the first "reality TV" I became aware of - and promptly ignored. And I never looked back.

A part of me wonders if they might be interesting for studies of behavioral science, but I am afraid the "reality TV" situations are too fabricated too be of any use in general situations. You only study a human in a container (or an isle, or whatever-else-you-fabricate), not the human in his natural environment.

Ultimately, the only reason they exist is because you can get viewers for very cheap money. You don't need to pay real actors (and you can exchange your actors ever season, so one trying to raise his price), you don't need as many writers, you don't need the SFX or production quality. And you still get enough money to get payed for your advertisement. It is a niche to fill a 24h/7d TV schedule. You can't create blockbusters for every hour of your program - heck, for most of the day, your audience is at work or sleeping, unable to watch. That can never pay off.

But personally, I'd definitely prefer reruns of old shows and documentations over reality shows. At least then, on the occasions I have time to zap around aimlessly, I might catch something interesting... (And no, I don't care for game shows or (fake) court shows or either.)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I think that depends a bit on what you call "reality TV". Shows like "Top Chef" for example, follow some of the "reality" pattern, but it is still more in line with a game show.
 

For the most part, I really dislike them. I'll admit that the voyeur in me enjoys Big Brother, but I'm fairly ashamed of it.

The only "quality" reality show I've ever seen in The Amazing Race, although I rarely watch it.
 


If you're talking about Distraction, it was ported over to America on Comedy Central for a season or two and hosted by Jimmy Carr, and is one of my all-time favorite game shows. I miss it dearly today.

Nope, I remember Distraction- that one featured things like electroshock and high winds, but they left your car alone.

The show I'm talking about, it was simply answer your questions correctly or walk home...your car was crushed in front of you on stage.
 

I'm going to have to go with bad.

There are shows that manage to be watchable DESPITE being reality TV (Top Chef, etc), but they'd be better as actual competitions rather than this reality TV format where the tasks are secondary to the backstabbing social interaction between the competitors.

I'd also distinguish between "Reality TV" which I feel describes a certain style of TV show. Probably starting with The Real World.

Something like Cops or other crime shows I'd almost classify more as a documentary style.
 

I think that depends a bit on what you call "reality TV". Shows like "Top Chef" for example, follow some of the "reality" pattern, but it is still more in line with a game show.
Top Chef is one of the few "reality shows" that I can stand watching my sister. She loves to watch Top Model too, which drives me crazy.
 


Nope, I remember Distraction- that one featured things like electroshock and high winds, but they left your car alone.

The show I'm talking about, it was simply answer your questions correctly or walk home...your car was crushed in front of you on stage.

Well, at least in the American version, prizes alternated between a set of five (including a "dud" prize like beans) that you had to randomly blow up for each wrong answer, and a car. The car games altered between letting the losing contestants destroy your car or some big guy hired by the show, but in general, the more questions you got wrong, the longer your car would get wrecked. You could take it home regardless of how damaged it was, though some ended up pretty un-drivable.
 

Since reality shows I don't watch seem unlikely to be replaced by shows I do watch, I don't have a strong opinion on them. If other people like them, that's fine.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top