“Reality” television
[738 words]

Summary of When Reality TV Gets Too Real by Jeremy W. Peters
[153 words]

In When Reality TV Gets Too Real, Jeremy W. Peters debates the ethics of not stopping dangerous situations from happening on Reality Television.
For this, several examples of such occurrences are cited, first when a participant took up drunk driving in the show Intervention, as well as similar episodes in Breaking Bonaduce, The Real World and Road Rules, and citing lawsuits against Big Brother, Kid Nation and Extreme Makeover, the last one getting sued for something else entirely.
A number of occasions is also named where the producer of Intervention stops dangerous situations from developing, namely when to prevent suicide, drunk driving and to call paramedics in the event of an overdose.
The article also states that the practise of simply filming while not stopping developing catastrophes are not technically illegal but somewhat unethical.
The text ends with the comment “It's a very, very delicate balance”, leaving the issue open for interpretation. Outline of text 2 through 4
[252 words]

In When Reality TV Gets Too Real, it is debated that Reality TV has a habit of creating dangerous or traumatic situations for viewers, simply because doing so is legal and gives higher rating. At times, some producers might draw the line though, and try to stop some situations from spiralling out of control, but those a more often the exception than the rule. A lot of shows have been criticized or sued for unethical behaviour towards their participants.
In TV kidney competition was a hoax, the premise of a show about a woman selecting which of three real people in need of a kidney transplant to donate hers to. It turned out that the woman was an actor and that there were no chance of an actual kidney getting donated. Nonetheless it has been praised for creating publicity towards an important subject, the need of organ donors in The
Netherlands, even if the premise was somewhat unethical.
In Ethics of Reality TV, Reality TV is criticized for thriving on controversy while giving no regards to the ethics of the situation. Reality TV is essentially social experiments what normal safety precautions which would normally apply. For example it is argued that Reality TV uses deception, cash prizes and fame to lure in contestants who might not be wholly prepared for the consequences.
The article further complains that there are no rules for when to stop or modify the show, or whether the contestants will receive counselling afterwards to deal with the trauma.

Comment on statement from text 2
”In recent years producers and networks have increasingly pushed the boundaries of television voyeurism in search of another ratings hit”

Page 1 of 2

Eng. B pt. 2 – 18-08-09

Section A: A Focus on reality television

22-01-12

[196 words]

While the above comment is somewhat true it is not entirely accurate.
First of all, the shows covered by the selected articles have focused enormously on a select niche of
Reality TV: the shows based on controversy.
The controversial shows are far from the most popular however, which explains the prominence of shows like: Top Model, Hell's Kitchen, X-Factor, America's Got Talent, Master Chef, The Most
Dangerous Catch, Miami Ink, American Choppers and so on, and so forth.
While some of these are borderline game-shows, all are Reality TV and most are more popular than
Big Brother, Jersey Shore and Robinson.
Secondly contestants are often chosen specifically to be entertaining while simultaneously retarded and/or jerks, leading the viewers to being unable to relate to the contestants at all. This leads to the fact that it probably isn't so much voyeurism as the basic need for entertainment that drives the viewers to tune in on the shows. This can also be seen by the fact that since the first season of Big
Brother, it has never actually been marketed as a limitation of privacy so much as an opportunity to look at douchebags ruin their own lives.

Article for Media Today about the appeal of reality television today
[137 words]

What does Snooki have in common with Nelson Mandela?
Nothing, besides the fact that you know her name, and perhaps her complexion.
Snooki is one of the many new celebrities made famous, not by their art, skills or accomplishments, but merely by being famous, or more directly, by appearing in Reality TV. Universally detested but eternally watched, Snooki and many of her fellow Reality Stars have gained notoriety by being dumb, obnoxious, bitchy, petty and backstabbing.
But what draws us to watching these trainwrecks get a-rolling?
Well, you could argue that it is a deep-sated curiosity that naturally occurs in all humans. You could also argue that it's a sort of voyeurism that today's ego-eccentricity has developed in the general populace. Personally though, I just think we're just hoping to be there when the retards kill themselves.