Reality TV shows are on the way out, or so suggests Tim Molloy in The Wrap’s March 23 article, “Are Viewers Tired of Reality TV? Aging Dancers, Bachelors and Idols Lose Their Bite.”
Indeed, as the article points out, many reality staples are putting up their worst ratings yet, including American Idol, which has been overtaken by imitator show The Voice. Other shows such as The Bachelor and Dancing With the Stars, each with many successful seasons under its belt, are doing worse than ever.
But does this ratings dive mean that the reign of reality TV is over? It’s hard to think so. Though these long-standing reality TV shows are beginning to flounder in prime time, there’s no dearth of reality franchises all over cable, whether it’s MTV’s Teen Mom, Bravo’s numerous Real Housewives spin offs, or TLC’s (in my opinion, nausea-inducing) My Strange Addiction.
These shows all exhibit similar premises: they often present people in pitiable situations, and audiences are expected not to relate with the characters, but to feel sorry for them (ie. Teen Mom) or take pleasure in their idiocy (ie. Real Housewives). Reality TV exploits a voyeuristic impulse that it did not invent, but hides it behind the veneer of “reality”—however contrived that reality may be.
Additionally, primetime singing shows like American Idol and X Factor, or competitions like Survivor and The Apprentice, operate a little differently, but are in the same ballpark: the competition shows often stay interesting through the clash of eccentric or divisive personalities.
That’s why Idol has always had great success showing off the truly awful auditions as comedic relief. Or why having Bristol Palin make the top three in the 2010 season of Dancing With the Stars was so compelling despite her inability to, well, dance. It’s the same pleasure that one gets out of watching a live sporting event: the rules and format are familiar, but the outcome is always up in the air.
Reality TV has always represented a cheap alternative to scripted programming, and its low cost partly explains why reality shows are now so ubiquitous. But that “illusion of reality” accounts for its widespread appeal, too.
Yet, it’s also clear by the faltering ratings of long-standing reality shows that these same programs cannot retain their former mass popularity in the face of shows with similar formulas becoming the norm all across television.
Herein lies an opportunity for artists: what’s to come next? In his creative manifesto, Reality Hunger, writer David Shields suggests that contemporary media has caused a craving for “the real,” which can be exploited by writers and artists to create new forms of expression.
Do the nosediving ratings of prime time reality shows disprove Shields’ premise?
Maybe not, and maybe the next revolution of form on television (and others arts, too)—of which the reality TV boom is the last—will be led by minds that can merge the new “reality” impulse with a more shaped creativity.
In other words, can “reality” be taken out of its tried and true—and flat lining—formulas and contests?
And I’m not postulating a totally novel idea. Sacha Baron Cohen’s 2006 comedy Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan would be an example of how the two have been merged.
By constructing a fictional stereotype, the “real” interactions that the character of Borat exhibits demonstrates both the ridiculousness of the stereotype—in this case middle-easterners—and prejudices that exist around the stereotype.
With Borat, we get our humor and crudeness in full, but we also get a damningly “real” social critique, a “reality” which coexists with the fictional.
And I’d be willing to bet that the next movement in television will exhibit that blend, too. Entrepreneurs take note (and send me a check!).
Mikey Angelo Rumore can be reached at michaelangelorumore@gmail.com.