Sunday, February 21, 2010

Reality Television: Oxymoron

By: Kari Duddeck

In the article Reality Television: Oxymoron by George F. Will he describes the workings of television and the ways that television has morphed over the years. According to George F. Will television is all about imitation. In order to make "good" television people create television shows off of other television shows and each time they put a spin on it to make it more and more interesting and shocking. George F. Will also argues that we are becoming more and more desensitized. Television shows are increasing the amount of violence, sexuality, and degradation and at the same time people aren't as easily shocked as the once were. We have become so desensitized that it is becoming harder and harder to take viewers by surprise so television producers just continue adding more and more violence, sexuality, and degrading material.

One of George F. Will's main points is the fact that television is all about imitation. One of the examples in the article was the television show Fear Factor. Fear Factor was created based on the MTV show Jackass. Fear Factor takes the basic concept of Jackass and adds different twists, not to mention money, to gain viewers and participants. Another great example of television imitation is the NFL versus the XFL. NBC recently created the XFL. The XFL took the main concept of the NFL and promised that viewers would see more violence and more cheerleaders' breasts. Another one of George F. Will's main points is that the shock factor is harder to achieve. The idea of imitation is what brings about the added shock factor. Because shows are imitated producers have to add more twists to make them different and prove to the television viewers that it is worth watching. In order to provide the needed shock factor television shows are adding more sexuality, violence, and degrading material. Because we have seen so much imitation and even more shock factor we are becoming desensitized and it is getting harder and harder to shock us. As an added twist more and more television shows are providing a monetary reward if participants follow through with the television shows stunts or answer their embarrassing and brutally honest questions.

In the article Watching TV Makes You Smarter by Steven Johnson, he argues that it takes more brain power to decode and think through some of the shows that are on today. George F. Will would argue that even if the television shows deal with more complicated concepts and it takes more brain power to pick up on the humor, those television shows are also contributing to our desensitized nature. George F. Will would argue that people can use their brains and think through shows without having to witness the extra sexual material or watch a scene from 24 where the secretary of defense authorizes the torture of his own son to uncover evidence of a terrorist plot.

In the article Thinking Outside the Idiot Box by Dana Stevens, Stevens argues that Steven Johnson's article was a weak argument. George F. Will would agree with the argument that Stevens makes. Stevens argues that the new complicated television shows don't necessarily make people use their brain and think outside the box. Television viewers start thinking about what is going to happen on the show next time. People don't watch certain television shows for the brain stimulation, they watch it for entertainment and because it is what is popular today.

Works Cited

Johnson, Steven. “Watching TV Makes You Smarter.” They Say I Say. Comp. Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2009. Print

Stevens, Dana. "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box." The Say I Say. Como. Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2009. Print

Will, George F. "Reality Television: Oxymoron." They Say I Say. Comp. Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2009. Print

5 comments:

  1. I really enjoyed reading this post, as I think you guys drew attention a definite trend in media today. I do agree with you and the author that we are being desensitized by many programs on TV. George Will hit the nail on the head when he said that the entertainment industry seems to increase the shock value on a regular basis. The scary question is... "when will the reach the limit??" and "is there a limit?" It's scary to think about what TV, movies and music will be like in the future. At what point does the FCC get involved?

    You stated that "people don't watch certain television shows for the brain stimulation, they watch it for entertainment and because it is what is popular today." I couldn't agree more; after all, how does a show that features people eating bugs make anyone smarter!?

    Great post!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think the group did a great job. I myself don't care for the violence and sex on the shows. That is too bad the producers have to resort to the shock level to get people to continue to watch their shows. Like it was said, what is the limit they will go to? Kathy

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is a very well constructed post; I thought your group did an excellent job summarizing George Will’s argument. I also thought your group did a good job explaining how Johnson would respond to the viewpoints of Dana Stevens and Steven Johnson. I also agree with what Renee mentioned on the limit of the shock value of modern entertainment. I agree that televisions shows are constantly trying to come up with the newest idea and they are becoming more and more outrageous. It almost seems as if television show producers are running out of ideas, and they are trying to come up with the most bizarre ideas to attract attention.

    ReplyDelete
  4. My partner Jody Parsons and I couldn't figure out how to post on this blog so we have to put our paper in this comment box, sorry for the inconvenience.

    According to the book They Say I Say Sherry Turkle “looks askance at today’s media-saturated culture, because of the way cell phones, computers, and other portable technologies undermine public spaces and community. (212) Sherry Turkle had a piece published in Forbes magazine in 2007, in the article she points out “five troubles that try her tethered soul” as related to the use of technology today.

    “ There is a New State of the Self Itself” Where she talks about the virtual self and how you can be just about anyone you want to be while online. There is a virtual world called Second Life where people who are normally socially awkward can be a social queen since they are interacting through a computer and not in real life. As Turkle says, “it is easier to express intimacy in the virtual world than the real world." She also adds that "online life provides an environment where one can be a loner, yet not alone.” Turkle is worried that soon people will stop even wanting to go outside and be social since they have a computer instead. We don’t want our kids learning social skills from a computer.

    Are We Losing the Time to Take our Time? Where she talks about people growing up and multitasking and having rapid responses. With the new technological age and people are always on the move doing something with the technology and “are we leaving enough time to take our time on things that matter?” Recently people make their world revolve around their blackberries, rather than what’s important like family.

    The Tethered Adolescent. Talks about how children are losing a sort of right of passage by having cell phone and having there parents on speed dial so they don’t have to experience some of the things that we did as children. This section also talks about how cell phones take away from the ability to be alone and children now a day don’t get to feel that. Children need to be able to feel independence, and how are they supposed to do that when they are have mom and dad one click away. Turkle believes that children end up being more dependent on their cell phones than their own self.

    Virtuality and Its Discontents. Speaks about how if we are always being watched can lead to political abuse.

    Split Attention speaks about “doing e-mail” while doing other tasks such as during classes, meetings, while talking to our children, walking down the street, driving cars, or when having dinner with our family. “Once done surreptitiously, the habit of “Self-splitting in different world becomes normalized.” Which means that we can be in the physical world while also being in the virtual world?
    I believe that Turkle would agree with Amy Goldwasser, they both have similar views about technology today. They believe that kids are too into electronics and are not focused on the important things in life. Turkle would love how Goldwasser says,” Kids today don’t read, don’t write, and don’t care about anything farther in front of them than their iPods.” I also believe that Turkle would agree with Dana Stevens when she suggests that the nation take a week off of TV.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Is it even possible to have reality t.v. I am not convinced of it. Because there appear to be camera persons with scripts following the subject around the home interfering inherently with the REALITY aspect of the so called Entertainment. It is an Oxymoron Entertainment fiasco.

    ReplyDelete