Has TV made us too voyeuristic?

[Addy01]

Dating in The Dark

4 Weddings

Dinner Date

The Bachelor

The Bachelorette

All the above are programmes where we the viewer gets to watch as people lay themselves open to us watching them date, marry etc.

I'm at home working today and watching Dinner Date for the first time. The outline of the programme is a single chap reviews 5 menus and then chooses three. He then visits the homes of the selected women to partake of the meal in the menu and a blind date.

For me it's kind of "car crash" TV, I don't want to watch because it's kind of cringeworthy, but it's kind of drawing me in.

So what does everybody else think about these programmes. Is this the next step on from internet dating? Will we in the future be prepared to lay our lives open to and have everything judged on how many points we score in somewhat false situations?

Are we losing our originality as human beings to simply interact with one another without the need for it to be "under the micro-scope" all the time?

[apple]

I really dont watch much TV. Maybe Top Shot, True Blood, or the history/discovery/travel stations~ but I dont get into many movies either. I drive everyone crazy cause I turn it off.

[Jo van]

"Famous for 15 minutes" is a tempting prospect for many people.

The "media" (TV) has played such an important role in our lives, and some people equate an appearance on it as representative of success (That message has been 'subliminally' implanted).

Many "Celebrities" have been "created" who are simply famous for being famous, and they are churned out of "reality" TV shows, as the next "vehicle for advertising", their wealth comes from commercial sponsorship, and advertising contracts. There is no correlation between merit/ability and fame, IMO.

Anything that draws an audience, is "successful" because it carries adverts,
it's "lowest common denominator" TV.
People are prepared to humiliate themselves for "easy money".
If they could show public executions, it would draw a big audience.

Instead they have to make do with wanking pigs, and eating grubs, or being covered in rats.
It's "car-crash" TV., you don't want to look, but you "can't help it."
Look at the contestants they select, most of them have "problems", or are "unstable" in some way.
Do you think that's an accident...?

Having said all that, I do watch boxing and rugby, which are both "reality" TV of a sort, in that the contestants are really trying to do something that is ultimately pointless, mainly for the entertainment of the audience...
"Horses for courses" I suppose....

[Stress Free]

TV and the media in general has made most of us numb to so many things. For me debate forums have such a good place in society because the written word is not so dismissive.

[restless_native]

So what does everybody else think about these programmes.

They provide a valuable service in so much as they give morons topics of conversation.

[ItsMargo]

GREAT post Jo Van!

Voyeuristic, no
Passive, yes

Reality programming was created as inexpensive filler; cheap "fresh" summer programming that was a surprise hit with people.

[eyeofthecamera]

Escapism in movies and TV is pushing past the boundary of civilization by allowing people to suspend their ethics and morality without social condemnation. The whole "Internet pórn" thing is much the same.

Will not be long before blood sports and the bread and circus approach will be sanctioned by governments. The problem of violence being addictive to some is not a popular subject, but it is very real and well studied.

It has become so bad that many now feel that they are entitled to engage in anti-social behavior to satisfy their petty thrills and need for person power. Do some reading on the effects of how people are becoming "desensitized" to violence and other social evils. You might find it informative.

[savona]

Ugggg I dislike reality shows. They are just so far from reality.

[ItsMargo]

Reality programming was created as inexpensive filler; cheap "fresh" summer programming that was a surprise hit with people.

No.

It started with the news and expanded to game shows and that is all you have today is just a game show with more of a back / front story.

First "reality" TV show - The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet , which started on radio in the 30's and then to TV in the 50's, followed closely by The Dating Game.

Every time I attempt to be succinct. LOL.
Shall we say... "the current round of reality programming, beginning with Survivor, was created as inexpensive filler; cheap "fresh" summer programming that was a surprise hit with people".

[ambien girl]

Shall we say... "the current round of reality programming, beginning with Survivor, was created as inexpensive filler; cheap "fresh" summer programming that was a surprise hit with people".

Nope.

Survivor was originally aired on the Swedish public service network SVT in 1997 as "Expedition Robinson" and then brought to the US market in 2000 and not created as a filler.

Also.

What about taking a film / production crew plus 20 participants to a remote location says "cheap"?


Now they did spark a "wow that show has made allot of money" lets get on that bandwagon, but it really is nothing new and follows the trend of American TV coping European shows. (ie. Big Brother, American Idol)

Uhm...and Real World?