Reality TV

The genre currently known as reality television emerged with the broadcast of the first series of Big Brother in the Netherlands in 1999. The concept merged audience surveillance and manipulation of participants, or “housemates,” and the celebrification of the ordinary (made celebrities out of the ordinary) as the content consists of the nominally routine activities of nonactors. While broadcast media includes a long history of consumer involvement and the incorporation of the everyday into entertainment, reality TV introduced new production methods and direct consumer participation. These new patterns of production and consumption persist through variations such as the Idol and Top Model programs over time and have been adopted on a global scale through local syndication. Theoretical implications of these developments draw in theories of surveillance, democracy, celebrity, and culture as the expectations and practices of consumption intersect with concurrent technological developments.

Boundaries between media space and ordinary space have long been blurred, as consuming audience members have appeared on television in crowd shots, vox pop segments, game and talk shows, and live studio audiences. The contemporary Funniest Home Videos has its origins in Candid Camera, first broadcast in the United States in the late 1940s, and talk and game shows have gradually increased studio audience participation. There are two primary differences between these incidental appearances of the ordinary and orchestrated audience participation and reality TV. The first is a shift in production values, which elevates the ordinary and creates the appearance of the democratization of televised entertainment. Graeme Turner describes this as the demotic turn, emphasizing the misleading nature of production methods that exploit the cultural value of fame and celebrity. The second is the nature of audience [Page 1201]participation in the form of voting, with complex ramifications beyond the phenomenon of reality TV. For example, voting for reality TV contestants is the first experience of democracy for Chinese consumers, and text messaging with mobile phones was uncommon in the United States before reality TV encouraged its use. Both shifts are profit driven, as one reduces production costs and exploits product placement while the other generates profits through partnerships with telecommunications companies.

The recruitment of nonactor members of the public represents a production cost saving as the remuneration of professional actors is replaced by the award of sponsored prizes and the promise of fame for contestants. Settings such as the Big Brother house offer product placement opportunities, and the selection and elimination of contestants can be incorporated into the content, such as the audition segments common in the early phases of many series. These selection processes can represent considerable savings, particularly where several episodes consist of video auditions produced by potential contestants. Televised selection processes contribute to the appearance of the democratization of entertainment, while continuing to discriminate on the grounds of photogenic and personality qualities. The cultural desirability of fame and celebrity ensures the supply of “talent” while the phenomenon of reality TV itself perpetuates the impression that fame is a realistic expectation.

Winning contestants are routinely offered prizes in the form of recording contracts, broadcast appearances, or other promotional activities beyond the series; however, these rarely evolve into careers. Promotional exercises using winners rarely extend to the next season, let alone beyond. With a new season, a celebrity series, or the production of a new reality TV concept, consumer attention turns to a new aspect of ordinariness, and the promise of celebrity is extended to a new round of contestants.

...