 |
|
|
|
I
Poll
iPoll
result
Do you agree with TV shows such as ‘Grande Fratello'?
Yes 56% No 44%
Big brother…
trash or tantalising?
By Karen
Barun
The Big Brother phenomenon that swept through the country was greeted
by two main opposite reactions: a sheer adulation on one part, heavily
counterweighted by total contempt on the other.
For the uninitiated, such shows revolve around having a group of
people who, for a predetermined amount of time, live together –
(get to know each other in an ideal world; fight and bed each other
in the TV world) whilst surrounded by cameras that record their
every movement.
Opponents of such ‘voyeuristic' TV claim that it lacks credibility
as it thrives on orchestrated emotions. Worst still, they say, it
lacks an intelligent agenda. Whilst it may appear to be a sadistic
practice to have a number of people enclosed for scrutiny as if
they were lab rats, one thing has to be kept in mind. These participants
chose to be there because they are exhibitionists, because they
want to be looked at, for whichever personal reasons they may have.
What amazes me is why some people consider such viewing as trash
TV while other pseudo real-life shows, like some talk shows (which
similarly expose people), variety shows (especially those which
‘surprise' their audience with a lost relative) and countless
soap operas (no need to comment) are aired with a guilt-free conscience.
There are other programmes which present footage showing fatal,
accidents and fights, for the same reason as the Big Brother: to
satisfy the deep pleasure of looking. Peeping Toms and nosy neighbours
know what I'm talking about. Whether Big Brother contains loving,
violent, intelligent or tear-inducing content is solely dependent
on personal preferences. It may not be a mentally stimulating show.
It may not be real, whatever ‘real' means when applied to TV.
It is just that thing someone watches for the sake of it.
After all, there isn't the sexually explicit or violent material,
which is more readily available everywhere in video stores. The
basic element of such shows is a simple concept; people who like
to be looked at by people who like to look at other people. The
others may as well switch channels.
Karen
Barun is a final year communications student
Big
brother…
trash or tantalising?
By Sandro
Mangion
When we started working on the production of Fr Colin Apap's 'Stejjer'
(Picturebox-MPS/One Productions) last summer we made a pledge to
ourselves that we would not sacrifice our guests' emotions on the
altar of viewership and popularity.
In every case we dealt with we went out of our way to explain to
those who wanted to share a part of their personal life with the
programme's viewers the consequences of being seen on the box. Not
everyone can stand being looked at and pointed at all day long.
Not everyone is capable of dealing gently with the supermarket cashier
who asks them whether their partner has returned home since they
launched an appeal on TV. Not every girl who has been chucked out
of her parents' home simply for telling them she is a lesbian can
take the immature giggling at the junior college canteen.
During these six months of programmes we have presented well over
100 different stories. But we have also discarded dozens of others
when we were afraid that the life of any of the people involved
could take a turn for the worse should those stories be told on
TV.
The fundamental question that all broadcasters who have a conscience
ask themselves regularly is: should broadcasters give the people
what they want or should they come up with productions they believe
the people actually need? In today's fiercely competitive media
market, the answer should be somewhere in the middle; a balanced
mix of both. Unfortunately, however, broadcasters of the Jerry Springer
type choose to make their bank accounts swell by presenting their
viewers with their guests' most intimate experiences - something
they know makes what we call 'good TV'. And, also unfortunately,
the ratings confirm that voyeur TV is highly in demand.
Let's face it: the urge to spy on others, to know as many details
as possible about what they are doing without them knowing, is not
limited to the peeping toms who spend endless hours gazing at scantily
clad girls and guys at Gnejna or Ghajn Tuffieha. And these type
of 'real TV' shows play on that weak point of ours... very successfully
I must say.
Human zoo shows such as Big Brother/Grande Fratello fall in the
same category. These 'programmes', which take whole months to unfold,
try to give the impression that what is being screened is the everyday
life of a group of people who are living under the same roof. Yet,
since all those involved are aware that they are being watched round
the clock, the relationships that develop during the transmission
period cannot but, to some extent, remain artificial.
For instance, certain innermost 'secrets', which when shared give
a strong precursor to a friendship, are undoubtedly not told if
one is aware that the whole world is listening. Can the viewers,
especially the young ones' suspension of disbelief, which is normally
associated with media consumption, make them think that the way
relationships should grow is as they see them on these 'laboratory
condition' programmes?
TV, at least as it has evolved, does not mirror reality. It can,
and is, building a reality of its own.
Sandro
Mangion is a freelance journalist and broadcaster and was co-producer
of 'Stejjer'
|
|
|
