For the most part I think that we are seeing the dregs of reality TV . . . . it is a phenomena that has far outlived its appeal
except, then all of a sudden American Idol comes back on and it is an interesting show (at least at the beginning)
Its intrigueing because it shows us how deluded we (people generally) are about ourselves, our talents and our 'dreams' . . . so many of the really awful performers thought that they were the best . . . it is profound in a way: its about the reality of limits, the glamour of the image and the image of glamour
But, for the most part they are all shiite and have a terrible effect on how our imaginations reflect on 'reality'
I just stay away from the whole TV mess, I've never watched more than 30 seconds of any reality show. I haven't really watched more than a half hour of tv in the past 6 months either.
Of course, I *DID* get sucked into Joe Schmoe, to my shame.
But damn, was that funny... not for him, but for the poor actors. He had them screwed up thirty ways from Sunday on a regular basis. Excellent example of adaptive acting.
Of course, I *DID* get sucked into Joe Schmoe, to my shame.
But damn, was that funny... not for him, but for the poor actors. He had them screwed up thirty ways from Sunday on a regular basis. Excellent example of adaptive acting.
Me too, that was the last "reality" show I watched.
Sorry guys, this is the most important sociological experiment of our age. Reality TV is an historic landmark in broadcast entertainment, although I do prefer for mine to at least pretend to be virtuous....like The Amazing Race (my fave) is all about getting somewhere, the in-fighting isn't necessary, it's something you can do if you are so disposed.
The only other RTV shows I've watched are Joe Millionaire (the first one), The Apprentice and My Big Fat Obnoxious Fiance. Amazing Race tops the list, but those others are fun to watch. American Idol? Eh. But regardless, sociologists are having a field day at these uncontrolled, non-blind experiments...regardless of the experimental flaws imbedded within.
I avoid most reality shows because they're just too phoney and manipulated by the producers.
The one that I DO enjoy is the original: COPS
It's kind of hard for the producers to reshoot and manipulate stuff on that one. "I'm sorry, I didn't get that 1/2-mile foot chase you just did Officer Johnson. Can you do that again?"
I'm not saying there's not creative editing on that show, but it's arguably the closest to "reality" of any program that claims to be such.
There was a great documentary on PBS a few nights ago that tracked the way that media affects society. By the end of the program the filmmaker, who also narrated, said that he realized that The Media and The Public were in a huge feedback-loop. The kids who had been shown sexual imagery ala Britney Spears were now in front of the documentarian's camera, bumping and grinding to show off....emulating what they'd seen on TV....which was now being filmed by a documentarian, to be shown on TV again.
It's recessive, its incestuous. Here's what talk show host David Letterman had to say about talk shows in a 1996 interview by Al Roker:
LETTERMAN: Sure, sure, but it's incestuous. It's Americans interested in television and television interested in television, and there are shows now on the air, television shows now on the air, dedicated and devoted to other shows on the air. I mean, this is what this is.
Now, if talk shows in 1996 were incestuous, consider how reality television and modern society will affect each other in this huge "feedback loop".
I'm telling you, there's more to reality television than the programs themselves. They're quietly reconfiguring the social consciousness of our age.
Comments
For the most part I think that we are seeing the dregs of reality TV . . . . it is a phenomena that has far outlived its appeal
except, then all of a sudden American Idol comes back on and it is an interesting show (at least at the beginning)
Its intrigueing because it shows us how deluded we (people generally) are about ourselves, our talents and our 'dreams' . . . so many of the really awful performers thought that they were the best . . . it is profound in a way: its about the reality of limits, the glamour of the image and the image of glamour
But, for the most part they are all shiite and have a terrible effect on how our imaginations reflect on 'reality'
aka: the Panopticon
reality tv? GET A LIFE.
Of course, I *DID* get sucked into Joe Schmoe, to my shame.
But damn, was that funny... not for him, but for the poor actors. He had them screwed up thirty ways from Sunday on a regular basis. Excellent example of adaptive acting.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Hate them.
Of course, I *DID* get sucked into Joe Schmoe, to my shame.
But damn, was that funny... not for him, but for the poor actors. He had them screwed up thirty ways from Sunday on a regular basis. Excellent example of adaptive acting.
Me too, that was the last "reality" show I watched.
Up yours, Trump.
Originally posted by Moogs
Up yours, Trump.
You're fired.
The only other RTV shows I've watched are Joe Millionaire (the first one), The Apprentice and My Big Fat Obnoxious Fiance. Amazing Race tops the list, but those others are fun to watch. American Idol? Eh. But regardless, sociologists are having a field day at these uncontrolled, non-blind experiments...regardless of the experimental flaws imbedded within.
Originally posted by drewprops
Sorry guys, this is the most important sociological experiment of our age.
In what way?
The one that I DO enjoy is the original: COPS
It's kind of hard for the producers to reshoot and manipulate stuff on that one. "I'm sorry, I didn't get that 1/2-mile foot chase you just did Officer Johnson. Can you do that again?"
I'm not saying there's not creative editing on that show, but it's arguably the closest to "reality" of any program that claims to be such.
Originally posted by Anders
In what way?
There was a great documentary on PBS a few nights ago that tracked the way that media affects society. By the end of the program the filmmaker, who also narrated, said that he realized that The Media and The Public were in a huge feedback-loop. The kids who had been shown sexual imagery ala Britney Spears were now in front of the documentarian's camera, bumping and grinding to show off....emulating what they'd seen on TV....which was now being filmed by a documentarian, to be shown on TV again.
It's recessive, its incestuous. Here's what talk show host David Letterman had to say about talk shows in a 1996 interview by Al Roker:
LETTERMAN: Sure, sure, but it's incestuous. It's Americans interested in television and television interested in television, and there are shows now on the air, television shows now on the air, dedicated and devoted to other shows on the air. I mean, this is what this is.
Now, if talk shows in 1996 were incestuous, consider how reality television and modern society will affect each other in this huge "feedback loop".
I'm telling you, there's more to reality television than the programs themselves. They're quietly reconfiguring the social consciousness of our age.
And not necessarily for the better.
Chew on that donkey rectum.