The Fine line between what is real in REALity Television

            Reality television has been taking over for years to come.  We do not even realize that we are invading on these people’s personal lives when the cameras are on them 24/7.  Through the media is evident that these people are choosing to put their lives out there for the public to see, but when things take a turn for the worst, they need to remember that they were the ones who opened up their doors to a camera crew. 

ABC there is The Bachelor/Bachelorette, on E! there is Keeping Up With the Kardashians and on MTV we have been brought into the lives of the cast members of the Jersey Shore and Teen Mom.  Although these are all reality show and it is supposed to be a real-life concept, we see that there is much work and preparation that goes behind all of it.  There is almost a confessional section of each of these shows where the cast members explain their actions and talk about their feelings.  This is obviously not their own doing because a production team is telling them to sit in front of a camera with lights in their faces and they must give a ‘tell-all’ story of what is happening in the various scenes.

In an online journal article it was stated that, “Reality Television surrounds us, having become a local and international force in television programming seemingly overnight.” (Comm. Research Trends)  This is true in that it ‘surrounds us’ because no matter what we do these reality stars are in our faces at all times.  They are on the front page of magazines, on shows other than their own such as Access Hollywood

Reality television usually becomes a series of episodes where we see the same common faces over and over again until we feel like we actually know the person.  If I were to run into someone on one of these shows like Keeping Up With The Kardashians or the Real Houswives of Atlanta I would actually feel like I would be able to carry a conversation with the person about something in their lives. 

But when do these stars cross the fine line between something that is scripted and something that is their own personal story?  We can hardly tell but there are some situations that have come out to be a fake story. 

For example, the MTV hit series The Hills came to a dramatic end as the cast said their final goodbyes during the series finale.  “The last scene of the 2010 series finale showed the camera panning out to reveal a Hollywood set, leaving everyone questioning.” (Sieczkowski)  Dedicated viewers watched along for six seasons and even witnessed the cast grow up on the original show Laguna Beach.  Those who were fans of the show were left wondering as they saw the backdrop of the ‘Hollywood’ sign come folding down.  Was the whole thing staged?  The drama and relationships that came about in front of the cameras seemed to had just vanished.  People were confused as to what had just happened and in utter shock that their time put into DVR-ing this reality series had just gone to waste.  One of the main members Kristin Cavallari has even come clean stating that it was "pretty fake." Adding, "Fake relationships, fake fights." “(Sieczkowski)

Some people tend to watch reality television as their ‘guilty pleasure’ because it can be pure entertainment.  It makes for great television because people are tuning in.  According to the Nielson “American Idol, Dancing with the Stars and The Voice all made the Top Ten list of regularly scheduled programs.” (Nielson)  Although these are competition reality shows they are seeming to get more viewers than your typical scripted shows.

But where do the producers draw the line between the REAL in reality and what is staged or rehearsed?  We do not know what happens when the cameras are shut off.  These ordinary stars must continue on in their daily lives.  However, by allowing a production crew to step inside your home and film your every move, you are putting not only your personal lives at risk but you must be willing to invite strangers into your homes when they are watching your show on every week. 

Works Cited

"Factual Entertainment And Reality TV." Communication Research Trends 31.2 (2012): 3. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.

"Nielsen Tops of 2012: Television." N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Feb. 2013.

Shih, Gerry. "Twitter and Nielsen Pair up to Publish New Social TV Ratings." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.

Sieczkowski, Cavan. "Kristin Cavallari Says 'The Hills' Was 'Fake,' But Lauren Conrad Feud Was Real (VIDEO)." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 04 Dec. 2012. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.

Do Premium Cable Networks Threaten Creativity and Acclaim for Broadcast Television?

     If you were to ask someone in the early nineties about some of their favorite shows on television, you would likely yield a response mentioning Seinfeld, FRIENDS, or Frasier. Ask them today and you’re more likely to hear Homeland, Game of Thrones, or Dexter. All iconic programs, however now there’s a visible trend of fan favorites residing not on broadcast networks, but rather on premium cable channels. So what exactly has caused this shift in interest and acclaim of premium programs by audiences across the nation? Well there’s a lot more to it than one would think.

     Since the turn of the millennium, premium giants such as HBO and Showtime have managed to slowly draw critics away from the “Big Three” television networks. These are NBC, CBS, and ABC, although FOX and The CW are also viable network competitors. This could be for a number of reasons, including content for instance. Premium cable networks are not held to the same strict standards as broadcast television. Since consumers pay for the channels at their own free will, programming can contain an abundance of swearing, violence, and nudity that would never see the light of day on any of the main networks. This freedom allows writers and producers to really break-free from the creative barricades of broadcast television laws and guidelines. Another reason viewers could be more drawn to premium cable is its lack of commercials. Again, because consumers pay in to premium networks they are not forced to rely on advertisers for revenue. Regardless of the reason, viewers and critics alike are applauding the original programming offered by premium cable networks, and shying away from the remaining hits on broadcast television. At the 2013 Golden Globe Awards, HBO and Showtime dominated with a total of 9 wins. Shockingly, not a single broadcast network program received an award that night (Bauder). 

     Broadcast networks have been down up to 18% in viewership of the 18-49 year old demo in recent years, and major cost-cuts have been made to even the most critically acclaimed shows (Flamm). Ironically, even with the substantial drop in viewership network television still garners three-times the viewers of premium cable networks. For instance, a recent episode of CBS’ The Big Bang Theory pulled in 18.98 million viewers in it’s most recent broadcast (Bibel), meanwhile HBO’s Girls pulled in roughly 1 million viewers in it’s broadcast on the same week (Kepler). That’s about an 18 million-person difference in viewership, yet Girls still managed to defeat The Big Bang Theory at the Golden Globes when competing in the same category. But how? What makes Girls, or any premium cable program for that matter, more acclaimed than its rivals? Joe Germscheid, director of consumer engagement at public relations firm Carmichael Lynch, weighs in, telling the Los Angeles Times, "What you'd call a 'hit' used to have a lot more viewers than it does now. A show still needs a lot of views, but it also needs a cultural currency. That can include everything from awards to blog items to mentions in social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter (Collins).”

     Viewers themselves are creating all the buzz any network could dream of having through social media, and positive word-of-mouth like that can go a lot further than any Nielsen rating. That buzz attracts viewers who later watch the show on-demand or with their DVR. That translates into greater viewership and results in pleased executives, especially when the shows pick up awards along the way. June Thomas explains in her Slate article “How Much Gold Is Game of Thrones Worth?” that essentially, “yes, premium cable does pay attention to ratings—just different ratings, and with different standards of success than at the broadcast networks (Thomas).”

     So how can broadcast television combat this alternate way of doing business? It’s a difficult feat, no doubt. It’s not enough to simply switch over to a premium cable’s business model, because broadcast television still relies heavily on advertisers for revenue. The big question is can broadcast networks produce acclaimed scripted television like that of their premium competitors, and still rake in the ratings and viewers that less-expensive reality or game shows manage to achieve? A question that is still up in the air. David Poltrack’s “Outlook for Broadcast Networks” presentation addressed one of the ways broadcast networks are moving towards a new way to process their viewership. “We now have a new model defining and segmenting the television audience which can offer us and our advertisers Nielsen “ratings” for each of the segments comprising the television audience as well as cross media usage profile encompassing the Nielsen online panel and the MRI data base (Poltrack).” He describes how age and gender are no longer enough to target viewership, and that the new ways we view our shows, such as online, need to be addressed. This new model could pave the way for broadcast networks to start putting their money towards more creative programming, however there is no way of knowing how long that may take, or if they will ever be able to compete with premium cable networks.

Work Cited

Bauder, David. "Premium Cable Wins Big, Broadcast Networks Completely Shut out at Golden Globes." The Dallas Morning News Online. The Dallas Morning News, 13 Jan. 2013. Web. 13 Feb. 2013.

Bibel, Sara. "Thursday Final Ratings: 'Community' & 'The Big Bang Theory' Adjusted Up; 'Person of Interest' & 'Elementary' Adjusted Down." TVbytheNumbers. Zap2It, 8 Feb. 2013. Web. 13 Feb. 2013.

Collins, Scott. "Cable Networks Are TV's Biggest Stars." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 30 Sept. 2012. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.

Flamm, Matthew. "Peacock network fails to take off, again." Crain's New York Business 10 Nov. 2008: 1. General OneFile. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.

Kepler, Adam. "Girls Ratings Down From Season 1 Premiere." Arts Beat. The New York Times, 18 Jan. 2013. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.

Poltrack, David. "The Outlook for the Broadcast Networks." UBS 39TH ANNUAL GLOBAL MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCE (2011): n. pag. Web.

Thomas, June. "How Much Gold Is Game of Thrones Worth?" Slate Magazine. The Slate Group, 29 Mar. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2013.

How DVR and On-Demand Changed Our Television Experience

            How many of you can say that you actually sit down and watch your favorite television shows during their live air time? I can honestly say that I almost never do. With the creation of DVR and the On-Demand function it isn't uncommon for viewers to watch their favorite programs two-three days after they air live on their networks. Especially college students and adults who work late, it is extremely difficult to find time to sit down on the couch and watch a program that is on at 8 or 9 o’clock. DVR and On-Demand changed the way audiences watch television. “DVR and other recent advances in technology are fundamentally changing TV-viewing patterns.” (Watson).  DVR and On-Demand aren't just changing the way people watch TV but how as well. There are many more channels to choose from and with on-demand apps of certain networks you are able to watch television shows right on your computer, smart phone, or tablet.

            Over 43 million households currently have DVR players (TVB.org). This shows that not only do many people choose to watch TV on their own time but that our technology has advanced drastically over the past decade. As we grow with the times, new forms of media are created to help change and improve our lifestyles. In the case of the On-Demand and DVR functions, it reflex the way we as Americans live. Since we tend to be ‘fast-paced, impatient, lazy’ individuals, it was about time someone came up with these devices and programs. The major networks, including FOX, CBS, NBC, and ABC, all have the On-Demand function. FioS and Comcast, the major cable systems, all include this function in their monthly packages. “One reason on-demand usage has increased is precisely because it has been made available for free or a relatively low monthly fee.” (Van Duyn). On-Demand functions are free online when you visit the networks sites, as well as through their iphone apps. This makes it possible for audiences to be able to watch television shows on the go.
             Not only can we watch a lot of TV whenever we want but we don’t have to sit through many commercials anymore; another important and controversial function of the DVR and ON-Demand functions. “Users say they love having the ability to stop or rewind live TV, record two shows at once and -- most of all -- skip over the commercials when watching a show later.” (Watson).  This brings up a bigger problem that the networks are trying to deal with; advertising. When dealing with DVR the networks don’t really have the capability to make the audience watch advertisements and commercials, however on On-Demand they do. Some networks choose not to show commercials during their on-demand programs while others have 30 second intermissions throughout.

             Because they know that many audience viewers are not thrilled to have to watch commercials, networks are trying to gear some of their advertisements towards their target audience. For example if someone were to watch Keeping Up with the Kardashians on E!, they might witness 30 second spots of a shampoo commercial or a fashion brand. “Addressable ad technologies that can serve ads targeted to specific demographic groups are becoming another major focus.” (Winslow). With the ability for advertisements to target their specific audience a lot easier with the on-demand programs, many networks are gaining interest from advertisers as well as gaining more money from these programs. “…a significant amount of interest from advertisers because it allows them to both target their messages and have better control over campaigns.” (Winslow).  Some networks still choose to let their viewers watch un-commercialized programs, in which case they could be losing a great deal of profits yet possibly gaining more viewers. 

 

Television as a Multiviewing Experience

Over the years it is clear that television has evolved into a whole new experience. We have gone from waking up early so we don’t miss our favorite morning television show, to being able to DVR our shows in order to watch them at any point in time. In the past, people would talk to their friends about the most recent episode the next day at school, but times have changed in this sense as well. Now, we are able to have a whole new experience while watching television.

It is clear today that when people watch television they are also using other devices, such as cell phones or laptops, or what is now called “second screens.” By using these second screens, the audiences are becoming more engaged in their television experience. A term that can be used for this is active-audience theories. “These active-audience theories do not attempt to understand what the media do to people, but rather, focus on assessing what people do with media”(Baran and Davis 242). Using a second screen allows television producers to know what the audience thinks of a particular episode or about certain characters. It shows what people are doing to further engage in their television show.

At first, the second screen viewing threatened the broadcast industry, but now it has seemed to help them capture an audience. Second screen television usage is done in a variety of ways. Many people are using their cell phones or laptops while watching their favorite shows. This allows them to contact their friends through text messages, tweet about something happening during the show, post a Facebook status, or even communicate in online forums specifically made for the show.

Many networks today are trying to create Facebook pages, Twitter accounts, Fan forum sites, and even apps for the Iphone or Ipad. They are doing this because they want the audience to be active and constantly talking about the television show. “Up to now, it’s been an unexplored spot, an intersection that is attempting to blend the old guard and the new. In one corner, the powerful, long-running powerhouse of broadcasting; and in the other, the impish, unpredictable field of social media” (Ashword).  For example, on Twitter, not only are there television show accounts, but also individual characters from these shows, as well as the actual actors and actresses. People are able to communicate with all of these accounts and be informed of sneak peeks, when the show is airing, etc.  These uses of social media are helping producers get feedback on their shows by getting audience’s reactions. “It turns every episode, every newscast into a live focus group. We’ll know instantly the pulse of the show, the overriding sentiment, what parts draw the most heat” (Ashword). Social networks are able to help capture ratings as well. “Nielsen Holdings NV, the television viewership measurement company, said on Monday it will partner with Twitter to publish a new set of ratings that measure chatter on Twitter about TV programming” (Shih). Now, Television programmers do not have to rely solely on ratings and research, which can be costly.

Gay Rights

In recent months one of the most talked about topics in the news has been the current issue of Gay Rights.  The Gay rights are human rights and civil rights.   These rights are controlled by government recognition of same sex relationships.  There are different punishments for homosexual activity around the world.  Some of these punishments can be as severe as jail time and even the death penalty.  Throughout the past few years the gay community has been receiving recognition and gaining more and more rights across the country/world.  The news has an interesting and affective way of conveying these issues to the public.  Different publications have varied ways of portraying the information and grasping the attention of its audience. 

            One Trade publication whose audience is the gay community is the Advocate.  The Advocate’s issues focus only on gay rights, and homosexual individuals.  When reading some of these articles and dissecting their website it was clear that these are very proud gay people who believe in their rights.  The article “How Two Phelps Family Members Become ‘Betrayers’” describes the change in heart of two Westboro Baptist church members that were extremely anti- gay rights.  The article shows them using picket signs that read “Death Penalty for fags”.  These two women realized their extremist views on the matter and released an apology titled “ Head full of Doubt/ Road full of Promise”.  The article concludes, “Don't assume too much, though. The two aren't now saying that being gay isn't a sin. But they appear sure that Westboro was wrong in saying gay people should be killed or can't be forgiven. And more revelations, of a kind, could be coming, because Megan Phelps-Roper told Chu, "I don’t feel confident at all in my beliefs about God. That’s definitely scary. But I don’t believe anymore that God hates almost all of mankind (Grindley)."  This story is a perfect representation of what the Advocate is trying to emulate.  They are trying to show their community that there is hope even in the harshest eyes.  The stories are uplifting, heart warming, and all about equality. (Grindley)   

               When looking for a general publication I found a gay rights article in CNN News.  This article is titled “Boy Scout leaders put off vote on gay membership”.  The basis of this article is the debate of whether or not openly gay people should be able to participate in the Boy Scouts.  Originally the Supreme Court issued that gay members were not allowed, however after recent turn around for the gay community, minds are changing.  Unlike the Trade publication this article has little to no opinion.  There is an equal amount of information supporting the side to ban gays from boy scouts and for equality of the boy scouts.  This article gives more quotes from political leaders and reports on stats.  For example; “The poll, conducted January 30 to February 4 by Quinnipiac University, found 55% of respondents favored lifting the ban. The school said 33% were opposed (Wian).”  This poll is in favor of equality for gays, however there is no spark of opinion in the writing.  There is no picking of sides; there is a neutral undertone with information supporting both views on the issue. (Wian) 

            One theory that can be seen in the news concerning Gay rights would be the “Spiral Theory”.  The spiral theory is a controversial theory that’s concept is on agenda setting on the “macro” level.  The originator of this theory, Noelle- Neuman describes the theory as follows; “Observations made in one context (the mass media) spread to another and encourage people either to proclaim their views or to swallow them and keep quiet until, in a spiraling process, the one views dominated the public scene and the other disappeared from the public awareness as its adherents became mute (Baran). “  This theory can be seen in the two publications that I chose.  The Advocate clearly takes a stance on what side they are supporting while CNN is less inclined to do so.  CNN is definitely beginning to show somewhat of a stance on the issue by showing stats that support the equality of homosexuals.  The media has the power to silence those whose beliefs are different from theirs.  The media plays a powerful role in what the public believes is right and wrong. (Baran)

            By dissecting the different forms of media we can see the roles that people take on certain issues such as gay rights.  The medias influence on gay rights is changing in a positive light and soon their will hopefully be equality for all men and women.   

           

                 

Works Cited

Baran, Stanley J. Mass Communication Theory. 6th ed. Boston: Wadsworth, 2012.

Print.

Grindley, Lucas. "How Two Phelps Family Members Become

'Betrayers'"Advocate.com. N.p., 07 Feb. 2013. Web. 07 Feb. 2013.

Wian, Casey, Casey Wian Reported from Irving, Michael Pearson Wrote, Reported

From Atlanta. Holly Yan, Catherine E. Shoichet, and Devon Sayers Also. "Boy

Scout Leaders Put off Vote on Gay Membership." CNN. Cable News Network, 06 Feb. 2013. Web. 08 Feb. 2013.

Hollywoodization of the News

The news is something that has been a part of American’s lives forever, from smoke signals to the nightly news on television to the New York Times app on your smart phone. It has warned us and informed us. So when did it become more about who is in the news instead of what?

            One of most important men covered in the news is the President of the United States, Barack Obama. While we are familiar with his policies etc., what else do we associate President Obama with in the news? Celebrities. The 98^th White House Correspondent Assn dinner, once known as the “nerd prom”, was now filled with “red carpets and photo lines”- a true “Hollywoodization of the weekend” (Johnson, 2012). The guest list included many celebrities and supermodels versus cabinet members and political powers (Johnson, 2012).  “The ritual of media companies inviting celebrities to their tables seem[ed] to have taken on more importance” such as Fox News Guests Lindsay Lohan and Kim Kardashian (Johnson, 2012). Another star studded event occurred in September of 2012 where President Obama was the guest of honor at a fundraising event held for him by none other than Jay-Z and Beyonce (Standard, 2012). The event was held at Jay-Z’s famous 40/40 Club and the tickets were $40,000.00 (Standard, 2012). This idea of Hollywoodization sparked Republican Party Chairman Ed Cox who felt that “America need[ed] a President more interested in the status of our allies abroad and our own unemployed at home than in partying with celebrities” (Standard, 2012). Obama was also seen at other “star-studded fundraisers” such as a $250 Foo Fighters concert and a $35,800 dinner with Will Ferrell (Martinez, 2012).  President Obama is only one example of infotainment and Hollywoodization used in today’s media news outlets.

            We depend on our news outlets as reliable sources to keep us informed about what’s going on locally and globally. War, conflict, arrests and the weather are some of the major things Americans want to be updated on daily or even hourly. However, those sources aren’t always as credible as we hope. One example of this Hollywoodization effect is Jenny McCarthy. According to the Columbia Journalism Review, the Chicago Sun-Times hired the “actress-model, author and activist” as a columnist to blog five days a week and write a weekly print advice column (Vanasco, 2012).  McCarthy’s main goal is to spread awareness about her belief that vaccines cause autism (Vanasco, 2012). The problem? Science says there is “absolutely no link to vaccines and autism” (Vanasco, 2012). Veronica Arreola, “an opinion writer on feminism and women’s issues and the director of the Women in Science and Engineering Program at the University of Illinois at Chicago”, explains how “someone of her statue to have a platform like this is really dangerous” (Vanasco, 2012).  

Was the Newtown Violence Caused by Autism?

            The News Media and journalists alike have always had the ability to highlight events and convey their importance of them by the amount of time a story is given. The news media has a very powerful role in how people view and think about what is important in society. One power that the platform of News Media has is the ability to agenda set and frame stories, as they seem fit. Agenda setting entails, "The idea that media don't tell people what to think, but what to think about" (Baran, 293). Other ways that the media sets agenda is through their vividness of presentation, position of the story as well as priming. Following the December 14th Newtown Elementary School massacre one of the main focuses of the News Media was on mental health and a possible link to the violence that was brought the attention on a national scale where it is now a political hot point that could bring change to the country.

            Since the massacre story broke on the morning of December 14th, it became an instant lead story that got the nations attention. Just as Columbine shootings took over the country, there has always been the idea in media as "if it bleeds it leads". The News Media positioned the story as a lead so it could get the most attention possible. A vivid picture was painted of the shooter Adam Lanza who killed 26 people and suffered from a mental illness.

            The conversation quickly turned from reporting on the actually events to mental health and violence. Within hours of the shootings it was reported that Adam Lanza suffered from Asperger’s that is a form of Autism. The News Media immediately ran with the notion that Lanza's Asperger's was one of the reasons why he pulled off the heinous act. Although of some of these reports were unconfirmed they steered the public to thinking that people with any form of autism were violent who could commit crimes such as Lanza.  The Columbia Journalism Review had an article titled Lanza, Autism, and Violence that is about how the News Media tried to agenda set by linking autism to violence.  In the article a United Kingdom based paper called The Telegraph is quoted to have made conclusions regarding Autism that were simply untrue.

     

            Those on the autistic spectrum have a more limited emotional range and can miss social cues, making it more difficult for them to communicate and feel empathy with others. Difficulties communicating can cause frustration, which can spill over into aggression. Several studies have found that violence and criminal behaviour are no more common in those diagnosed with autism than they are in      the general population. (Brainard) UK Telegraph