Critical Investigation

Why are reality TV talent shows so popular and How do they reflect the values of British society?
“Television is an anaesthetic for the pain of the modern world.” (Astrid Alauda).
Since 1999 the United Kingdom has become home to a variety of reality TV talent programmes, the most established products being 'X-Factor' and ‘Britain’s Got Talent’ attracting X-Factor audiences up to 19.7 million during 2010. Each targets a mass audience, however, the varying talent on each show also creates a conflict of opinions between the viewing public. As suggested by the opening quotation, television has arguably become a gateway to escapism. “Some audiences get hooked on these shows because they help them escape their own real lives.” This is demonstrated through the Reality TV genre itself, as audiences are able to “escape” their lives and watch the lives of others. Another audience gratification that is provided is identification. Audiences are able to identify themselves with the contestants on the show as they are “ordinary people”. This encourages audiences to personally identify themselves with the show and aspire to fulfil their dreams like shown on reality TV programmes.
“The genre covers a wide range of programming formats, from game or quiz shows which resemble the frantic”. The ‘X-Factor’ and ‘Britain’s got Talent’ are classified as talent shows. They satisfy both extremes of the public needs; one of the unknown individual to achieve fame and fortune and the other to fail miserably and gratify the audiences need for comedic entertainment, which can be considered an important British value. Therefore it is fair to say Britain values humour as it is always expected and anticipated in reality shows, reflecting on how much audiences enjoy the humorous aspect within the shows. This first emerged with the hit series of “Big Brother” “in the year 1999 attracting 3.4-4.0 million viewers.” However, this binary opposition of success and failure has in some aspect become a norm for reality TV talent shows in Britain. Our British society has adapted to this form of television, where they would laugh at the expense of others, which some may argue is being conveyed through iconographies shown on screen along with the typical codes and conventions of a reality TV talent show. Audience gratification is provided by contestants either being “booed” off stage or delivering an astounding performance. The portrayal of this opposition not only attracts a mass and diverse audience but also promotes the show and the contestants. Levi-Strauss argued that these “oppositions reveal our tendency of classifying our complicated reality by giving explanations” . This in regard to shows like the ‘X-Factor’ and ‘Britain’s got Talent’ indicates, that the use of binary oppositions within the reality TV genre helps classify the contestants on whether they are considered good or bad. This then gives the audience a sense of superiority as based on their judgements, they are able to vote to save whom they regard as most worthy. Therefore the use of binary opposition helps audiences classify acts giving them a reason to judge their acts and keeping them engaged with the show. This is a reason for why reality TV talent shows could be seen as so popular. In addition, the idea of voting allows audiences to have their say, gratifying their needs of freedom of speech. By allowing audiences to vote for their favourite contestants, the programme offers the audience democracy. Democracy is an important British value and audiences value the democracy present in British society.
Looking closely at The X Factor and Britain’s Got Talent, it can undoubtedly be argued that these so called “reality” shows have in some ways been constructed to appeal to their mainstream audience. Therefore some say “reality no longer means what it meant”. However Critics claimed “events on screen are manipulated through editing and other post-production techniques ”, for example, the extreme exaggeration presented on both shows gives the audiences a reason to believe that the show is “unreal” or “constructed”. An example of this in regard to both shows is the sudden glamorisation of contestants. This includes their outfits, lighting, sets, promotional photos and new looks. All this put together works to provide certain audience gratifications such as having a personalised relationship with glamorous people or even the gratifications of seeing that hard work pays off. This links in with the Reception Theory, which is “the way individuals receive and interpret a text, and how their individual circumstance affects their reading” . This is proven true by many media theorists such as David Phillips where everything on screen is interpreted differently, for example, those of a working class status would consider shows like the X-Factor and BGT to be very glamorous. This is because the range of shots used for example, Low angle shots of Cher Lloyd allows her to look very superior and the viewers inferior as we feel as if we are looking up at her. The use of high key top lighting also plays a major role as it connotes brightness suggesting there success and happiness while performing. However on the other hand, the use of non-diegetic emotive music heard when revealing the results for example in the final episode of X-Factor and BGT, reinforces the typical conventions of “reality” and therefore suggests the idea that reality TV is constructed. This is because the use of non-diegetic sound for example a heart beat replicates exactly how the contestants are feeling and also get the audiences at the edge of their seats. This exaggeration of music creates “hype” within the studios and for the audiences as they anticipate the results. The back stories of contestants also reinforce the ideologies of reality TV, a contemporary example of this would be X-Factor 2010 during the bootcamp where Matt Cardle talks about his personal life, how it has changed and most importantly what importance the next song that he will sing holds for him. These back stories are shown for all contestants. This shows the contestants are ordinary people like its audiences, and therefore audiences are able to personally identify themselves and build a personalised relationship between them, resulting in the show becoming more popular. Furthermore, the shows use of ordinary people creates working class heroes. For example, Mary Byrne in X-Factor 2010 was transformed from an ordinary lady working at Tesco, to a glamorous “working class hero”. This image of her had been constructed from her very first audition in episode 8 where Louis Walsh said “it was one of the most real auditions of the whole day” suggesting they love her simplicity. Her image was further created when Cheryl Cole said “that was my favourite audition of Dublin” and Simon Cowell said “I think you have the best voice out of everyone who has auditioned today” , this boosts her image as she is greatly praised, transforming her from the “ordinary” person to a “working class hero” within her first audition. Also, the episode broadcast on December 5th was when Mary had been voted out the competition, yet she still appeared on frontline newspapers and magazines such as The Sun and OK magazine even though she had been eliminated from the show, clearly portraying her transformation form an “ordinary person” to a “working class hero”. This gives the audience a sense of hope that anyone can achieve fame and implies Britain takes pride in watching someone’s life change for the better, suggesting it could also be considered a British value.
“The shows vary in theme and material and every show is designed to attract the biggest possible audience.” This highlights the fact that reality TV is produced in the interest of its audiences suggesting that British society are adapting to this “relatively new form of entertainment” in comparison to their daily dramas. With this it is suggested that British Society enjoy watching “top notch” programmes such as X-Factor and BGT as it is out of the ordinary where the most common man becomes a celebrity over night. A clear example of this is Britain’s Got Talent and the performance of Susan Boyle in 2009 - episode one. This is where Boyle blew the audience and the judges away with her amazing talent which was really not expected of her. Pierce Morgan said “Without a doubt that was the biggest surprise I have ever had in 3 years on this show” she was then seen on every news channel and paper not only in the UK but also nationwide for example on CNN. This creates publicity for the show and therefore it becomes very popular. The portrayal of any person turning into a celebrity is the main reason for why the British Society enjoy watching such shows. “The repetition of representations and ideologies across texts and platforms acts to reinforce and naturalise certain ideas.” For example fame can be achieved by any one and not just the elite as Antonio Gramsci refers to in his study of Hegemony. Therefore this gratifies the audience’s need of entertainment as well as personal identification. As a result, reality can be considered as reality as “representations are created and used” from these shows creating positive publicity and therefore increasing the popularity of the show.
In addition, both shows use different ways to gain a larger audience. They create an emotional attachment with the audience when they broadcast contestants going back home and visiting their family and friends. This helps personalise the relationship the audience share with the contestants. This is because those who have family and friends would be able to identify with the contestants, therefore it creates emotional bonds between them. By strengthening these relations, it enables both shows to reach out to a larger audience. “The bigger the audience, the more money the shows make” . This is typically true as the bigger the audience the more audience interaction they gain. For example more people call in to vote giving the institutions a higher revenue. It could also be argued that the voting system is another form of democracy as it makes the show increase its popularity as audiences feel they have power in the sense they could eliminate contestants and most importantly take on the role of a judge in their own comfort zones at home, like Phillip Rayners quoted that “it is the audiences that are now in control” therefore, like politics, the X-Factor inspired members of society to run campaigns in order to promote a certain candidate win. For example in the 2010 series of X-Factor, campaigns were held through viral marketing in order for Wagner to win. This is a clear example of democracy and how popular the show is as a result.
In conclusion, there are many reasons for why Reality TV talent shows are considered to be so popular. It is an ever growing genre appealing to a mass and diverse audience offering an alternative to traditional television genres. The reality TV genre borrows successful conventions from other TV genres such as comedy, drama and documentary to achieve a broad audience appeal. Both, The X-Factor and BGT accept those from all different ethnic minorities and of all ages. This rejects ethnocentric ideologies and therefore increases the show’s popularity and audience and reflects contemporary values within a multi cultural society. It is clear that the main value of British society is that they enjoy supporting the “under-dog” throughout their journey in the show. This is done through the voting process as they enjoy watching people pursue their dreams. Also, democracy can be considered another important British value included in reality TV programmes which provide the audience with a sense of power and therefore gratification.

Exam Practice Questions

Watch an episode of a contemporary reality game show. In what ways do the editors construct contestants into particular character roles? Is this helpful for the audience or does it manipulate audience responses too far?
There are many character roles present in today’s contemporary world of game shows as they vary on the contestant’s personality. For example in shows like Big Brother which is famous forb its voyeuristic footage where there are diverse people from all different parts of the world and ethnicities all living together under one roof is known as one of the most popular reality TV show that creates stereotypical stereotypes and alternative representations. In the 2009 series, there was a lot of controversy present as Jade Goody had been labelled and given the character role of a “bully” whereas, Shilpa Shetty on the other hand was given the character role of the “innocent victim” the reason for why Jade Goody was stigmatised with this label was because of her “aggressive” nature as she always get into multiple fights and arguments with different members of the Big Brother house. However, the shots in which Jade Goody was presented on screen with reinforced her given character role. For example in episode 12, the whole show was focused on Jade Goody and her aggressiveness towards others. She was shown in low camera angles, making her look a lot more dominant, aggressive and infuriated. Whereas Shilpa Shetty was being looked at from high angle shots, almost like a birds eye view shot, making her looking timid and inferior to Jade. Other character roles that were constructed were of Jermaine Jackson, as he was given the character role of the “saint”. This is because he was always shown on screen trying to either stop or prevent an argument. He was always presented in medium close ups, sitting down peacefully, or getting along with everyone else. This may have been because of his highly reputable name. Following the hegemonic structure, he is very famous and well known; therefore the institutions will only portray him in a positive manor, as he is considered elite himself. However, Jade Goody was an easy target to be presented in such negative manors as she is not famous or well known and certainly does not have a reputable name; therefore it is easy for institutions to place her in character roles that they would not be able to place anyone else. Therefore hegemonic structural values are clearly evident as the elite favour the elite, as they are powerful and the dominant ones within the house, in comparison to those that are considered the subordinate characters. As a result it clearly manipulates audiences responses too far as shots reinforcing negative ideologies are hypodermically injected into the audiences minds and therefore act upon their opinions, by out voting that contestant. This also gratifies the audiences need of entertainment as it gives them pleasure by voting off the contestant they don’t like, giving them a sense of superiority as it empowers audiences to pick and choose who they want to stay on the show and who they don’t want.

Exam Practice questions

Compare and contrast the representation of teenagers in the two texts.

The game Bully trailer portrays teens in a negative light. This is done in many ways for example, the way in which the boy is dresses, goes against the social moral codes of how a teen/ schoolboy should dress. For example, in the trailer his shirt is un-tucked, which stereotypically is the get up of those who act deviant by going against the rules and regulations of the school creating negative representation of young teenage boys. Also, the way in which he is presented reflects the negative representation of teens as he is shown as the typical yob, which always causes anomie within society and social surroundings. He is shown as bullying other school kids, clearly suggesting he is deviant as he goes against the typical codes and conventions of behaviour on the school premises. This hypodermically injects the idea into the minds of young teenagers that acting rebellious within school and society is acceptable, whereas in reality it isn’t, therefore this may cause conflict as it may encourage teens to act in this inappropriate manner. Also, teenage school girls are also represented in a negative manner as they are shown making out with other school boys, reflecting them as sexual objects, especially through the way in which they are dressed and presented to the audiences. They are shown wearing short miniskirts, with their shirts hanging out. This follows the typical conventions of a deviant school girl, who are stereotyped as most likely becoming teen mums as a result of their sexual behaviour, as shown in the trailer. These stereotypes of teenage mums are reinforced through representations like these as miniskirts connote a sexually sinister school girl character who would be more than happy to break away from the norms of society by acting and dressing inappropriately. Similarly, Skins trailer also represents teens negatively. This is done through the montage of shots you are faced with of teens getting high and being sexually active. These are actions that are being carried out illegally and under age, therefore clearly suggests they are deviant as they are breaking the law, norms and values of society and instead leading the path of rebellious teens, who always causes anomie within society and social grounds, the same way shown in the bully trailer. They are also dressed the same as shown in the Bully trailer, as they all are dressed untidily in their school uniforms stereotypical signifying the “naughty kids”.