Reality TV

I wrote this article for a uni assignment, the topic is the heading. It is one of my finest pieces of article writing... which is funny considering it was a last minute thing...

Are Reality TV Programs Soap Operas Under a Different Guise?
Reality TV programs are becoming more like soap operas in the modern world. Where previously these shows existed to show us, the viewer, an insight into the realism of everyday life as in the Big Brother series’ or what everyday life was like in times gone past (for example 1800s House). Nowadays however, it seems that reality TV programs are merely produced for entertainment purposes (for example Survivor and There’s Something about Miriam). However, perhaps the most important element of a reality TV show is the concept of talk and the role it plays in the narrative types and techniques used in both reality TV shows and common soap operas linked by these techniques.

Let’s face it: reality television shows are addictive. Big Brother, for example, has attracted millions of viewers around Australia and even spawned off into other Big Brother seasons in Australia as well as other series worldwide. However, it is how it attracts its audience that intrigues us, the analysts, the most. “Reality shows… restore to viewers the kind of old fashioned theatricality that can still be found on day time soaps” (Stanley, “Blurring Reality with Soap Suds” NYT 22/02/2003). That is to say, that reality shows use the same or similar scripted storylines as do soap operas. However, this does not mean that reality shows are ‘not real’. Take a look at Big Brother – just because the events that happen are pre-planned (like the splitting up of the “housemates” ) does not mean that the housemates’ reactions are fake. “Television is not the ‘dream factory’ which Hollywood was once said to be… it is truer to life than life is [itself]” (Morse, “Talk, Talk, Talk”, 2)

As in Big Brother the television soap opera Home and Away employs the same kind of techniques to attract its audience. Character schemes and plots for the elimination of a character in Home and Away mirrors the plotting and scheming to “evict” a housemate in Big Brother or to form alliances and to “vote off” other contestants in Survivor. ‘Boston Rob’ on Survivor schemed, plotted, backstabbed and was generally portrayed as a loathsome character, whereas Rupert, was shown in a different light – Rupert was the viewers favourite “Survivor”. Rupert was seen as being fair and truthful while doing the same thing as Rob – playing the game. Yet, Rob’s strategy worked. Rob gained the trust of the other contestants through his manipulative meanderings and formed alliances until the very end of the game. Regardless of the outcome, both Rob and his ‘ partner in crime’, Amber, won when Rob proposed to Amber in true soap opera-like fashion. “Viewers who doubt that anyone would ever say ‘my walls have finally crumbled and I can now tell you without reservation that I am in love with you’ are too sceptical… dozens of women [say it] every day – on soap operas.” (Stanley)

The camera shots, music and lighting that the characters in Survivor were shown in gave the program the same air of a soap opera. A previous plotline on Home and Away saw the character Angela Russel, being portrayed as a truly evil character as she manipulated the minds of those around her to get just what she wanted. It was this malicious deceitfulness that led ‘Angie’ to her downfall. In this same way, Rob’s deceitfulness led to his uprising in Survivor.

However, there is also a strong concept of entertainment to entice viewers to watch both soap operas and reality TV shows. A recent episode of television program The Simpson’s saw the Simpson family ‘become TV stars’ by agreeing to go on a reality show where they had to live life much like the occupants of the real-life reality show 1800s House had to exactly live life like it was lived in the 1800s. The viewers (of The Simpson’s) were then given the point of view of the Simpson’s, the viewers of the reality show on which the Simpson’s appeared and that of the producers of the reality show. Here we were shown just why reality programs in modern times have been touched up so much – a reality show that just runs as is, with no interference from anyone proves to have a low interest level. That is why such programs need a higher influence, a third character (by ‘third character’ we divide the program into three sets of characters: the good, the bad and the neutral the neutral being the higher influence). For Big Brother there was the character ‘Big Brother’ – a God-like figure whom the housemates do not see, but receive instructions/commands (“Terri to the Diary Room” for instance), warnings and sometimes even evictions. Similarly, Survivor had host Jeff Probst who sets the tasks in an almost symbolic test-like fashion of physical prowess and mental stamina. It is Jeff Probst who announces the departure of a contestant after they have been voted off (“The Tribe has spoken” ). Co-executive producer on The Bachelor series, Mike Fleiss, quoted in Alessandra Stanley’s article “Blurring Reality with Soap Suds”, comments on the making of a reality television program: “It’s storytelling and viewers are more satisfied when we work the spin”

Creating a reality program, however, does not always require a constant “authenticity and unpredictability of prime-time reality” (Brian Scott Frons in Stanley). This is shown in the Jim Carrey film The Truman Show, while in itself a fictional text; the film does contain many of the qualities that are essential in both reality shows and soap operas. For example, the effort the producers put into the reality program (incidentally of the same title as the film) ‘The Truman Show’ to ensure that Carrey’s character, Truman, does not discover that his life that had seemed so real to him is in actuality just one big ‘act’, even his ‘family’ are just hired actors. The producers also went to extraordinary lengths to keep Truman in the one town, including a fake forest fire, ‘sold out’ plane tickets and even faking the death of his ‘father’ (also an actor) by drowning to ensure that Truman developed a phobia of water and crossing it. “The impression of discourse… simulates the primary means by which we assimilate perceptions as our experience; through discourse we maintain a sense of the real through dialectical relationships with consciousnesses other than our own” (Morse, 3).

Perhaps the most important concept that features prominently within both reality shows and soap operas is the concept of talk. Soap operas, not unlike movies and television dramas rely heavily on dialogue, whether spoken or through other means, such as camera techniques, soundtrack, etcetera, to tell the story. This concept is commonly referred to as narrative (Berger, 4). A narrative is a story in any shape or form and is constantly around us as Peter Brooks (1984) in Arthur Asa Berger’s “The Nature of Narratives” (1) states that “Our lives are ceaselessly intertwined with narrative… we are immersed in narrative.” Talk and the concept of narrative play important parts in our lives, for without a story there would be no life. If there were no narratives, our lives would be like single-frame cartoons, which Berger argues are not narratives. “Such cartoons give us a moment in time, but they contain no sequence…” (2). this works in much the same way as a reality show or soap opera, with the exception that the story is practically already ‘made’. Sometimes, we as the viewer are presented with single-frames and contrary to Berger’s earlier comments, we are presented with a narrative. This, while not straight forwardly telling a story still tells a story using what is known as implied narrative. That is, the viewer is presented with a single-frame, and the viewer ‘makes up’ the story. Similarly, the same concept is applied for the narrator, this term is known as implied author (Morse, 4). In reality programs, the implied author is often the host, who hides just off screen for example being in Big Brother where the god-like figure of Big Brother hides off screen while he speaks to the housemates to tell them of upcoming events (such as an eviction or a story plot – e.g. Schoolies week type party). In soap operas, the implied author often heralds the introduction of a new character or the return of an old one. In this sense, the hidden character often intervenes in an event or argument while still been hidden. This character could be sinister in nature, or not, however it is at this point that the introduction of an advertisement break, or the closure of that show’s episode or the conclusion of the season, leaving the viewer to contemplate whom this character might be, what they might look like, what their nature is, and so on and so forth.

It is from these examples and arguments that it can be determined that reality TV shows are just soap operas under a different guise. With narrative, prominent in both ‘texts’ (Berger, 1), camera techniques – showing different characters in a different light (such as sinister, or innocent), soundtrack (used in the exact same fashion as camera techniques), the level of entertainment and the creation of such entertainment and sometimes even the omission of “authenticity and unpredictability of prime-time reality”. It is in this way that we are often unable to distinguish the subtle similarities used in both reality TV Programs such as Survivor and soap operas such as Home and Away.

Bibliography

•        Stanley, Alessandra. “Blurring Reality with Soap Suds.” New York Times 22/02/2003
•        Morse, Margaret. “Talk, Talk, Talk.” Screen 26.2 (1985): 2-4
• Berger, Arthur Asa. “The Nature of Narratives” in Narratives in Popular Culture, Media and Everyday Life. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 1997, 1-2
•        Big Brother c/o Southern Cross Network, Australia
•        Home and Away c/o PRIME Television, Australia
•        Survivor c/o WIN Television, Australia from Fox Studios USA
•        The Truman Show c/o Southern Cross Network, Australia

Reviews

[Owl]

This piece is excellent, really well written.

I'm doing Media Studies at College and next term we'll be coming onto exactly this subject, so this was great to read. From what I've already learned (which ain't much) I can't definitely see where all your theories are coming from, and you've explained them incredibly well - by which I mean you never sounded patronising, which I find hard to do when talking about Big Brother.

Heh, great piece.

Really well written, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this.
Gah I hate soap opera's and reality television. But this really was interesting, I feel more informed now.
-ST