# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Unscripted television - now referred to as "reality" mostly so that people can put the word "reality" between appropriately skeptical quotation marks - has always been accused of being stupid, vapid, empty, and responsible for crowding out the good stuff that scripted television can accomplish.

Let's put that part aside.

Right now, the swelling chorus about this genre is not talking about long-term degradation of audience intelligence, but crises created for participants. What has put this on the front burner is the suicide of Russell Armstrong, the estranged husband of Taylor Armstrong, one of the women featured on Bravo's The Real Housewives Of Beverly Hills. His collapsing marriage was a major storyline on the show, which has an entire upcoming season in the can in which he plays a role. Bravo has decided to air the season, but has announced that there has been some re-editing, and that they'll air a special so everyone can talk about their feelings about it - everyone except his estranged wife.

In the aftermath of this developing horror show, Matt Zoller Seitz wrote a piece at Salon, and Andy Dehnart has published a feature in Playboy (which you really still can read for the articles, but be aware that your employer might not approve of the URL), about the potential hazards that can lie ahead when, as Matt Paxton of Hoarders says to Dehnart, "combine mental illness with entertainment."

As much as the purest solution (and the purist's solution) is to tell everyone to stop watching it entirely, any argument that it's unethical to watch entertainment that poses genuine risks to people would also take down football, boxing and the circus. That kind of entreaty may be justified, and can still be offered, but it will almost surely be ignored, and it's a bad idea to cling to it so fiercely that in the meantime, nothing else changes.

There is also, I'm sorry to say, no solution for people who want to watch The Real Housewives Of Beverly Hills without guilt - and I say that as someone who, while I don't watch that one, has watched the New York version. If you want to watch some of this stuff, you have to live with the fact that it exploits emotionally charged situations and could easily cause psychological harm to people, whether it was responsible for what happened to Russell Armstrong or not. The amount of risk you can live with is up to you (and has been very much on my own mind), and you don't necessarily have to feel worse than a football fan, but yes - know what you're into.

But just as responsible sports teams can make responsible decisions about minimizing risks where they can, there are ways for shows that absolutely don't have to be so exploitative and potentially damaging - shows like Survivor and The Amazing Race and Project Runway and Top Chef and even American Idol and Deadliest Catch - to take their responsibilities to participants more seriously and to distinguish and brand themselves as the shows committed to existing on the do-less-harm end of the spectrum. How do you accomplish that?

With a voluntary, industry-adopted ethics code that would allow a show that wants to agree to specific measures that minimize ( do not eliminate, but minimize) potential harm, and in return to be marketed as Not That Kind Of Show.

The fact that these measures would increase the costs of producing code-compliant shows is a feature, not a bug. You can spread some of the risks - which are currently dumped entirely on participants - to producers without making it unreasonably expensive to produce shows, and if a certain number of viewers decide they're going to favor code-compliant shows and a certain number of advertisers decide they're only going to advertise on code-compliant shows, some of those costs would be offset. It will ultimately be the responsibility of viewers and advertisers, in other words, to shop for ethical television the same way they might shop for ethically produced goods of any other kind, and to provide the financial incentives.

Meanwhile, everybody sleeps a little better. Just a little.

There would still be plenty of non-code shows - Jersey Shore isn't going to adopt any code of ethics, and its viewers aren't going to care - and plenty of networks to air them. But there are people who are not stupid, who don't love seeing people get hurt, who don't relish the idea of injury or emotional damage, who enjoy Survivor and Project Runway and would like to think basic protections are in place to protect people's well-being to the degree they can be.

So, the nitty-gritty: What would such a code contain? Well, let's draft one. Some of these provisions are probably pipe dreams, some are utterly obvious, and most are - in my opinion as a longtime viewer and someone who has a few friends who have actually been on these shows - completely achievable for the vast majority of mainstream shows without damage to the product. There are undoubtedly things I haven't thought of, so feel free to add your ideas in the comments. Again, nobody has to make their show this way if they don't want to, but every little bit helps.

It would be more expensive and it would close a few doors, and yes, some potential for exploitation drama would be sacrificed. But it would also prevent the baby of a perfectly good game show or documentary show from being thrown out with the bathwater of The Real Housewives Of Beverly Hills.

Here's what I'd ask of a code-compliant show.

Aftercare and counseling. Shows agree to provide up to three months of post-appearance counseling for any participant who requests it.

All contracts must be public. Shows agree that all contracts participants are asked to sign will be available on the show's web site.

Limitations on alcohol. Shows agree that producers will not use footage of participants who are intoxicated if the alcohol was provided by the producers.

Sleep requirements. Filming will be scheduled so as to allow at least six hours of uninterrupted sleep at least five nights out of every calendar week.

Minors. Shows agree to use no non-incidental footage of any child under age ten, and to employ an on-set counselor specializing in adolescents to provide care and advice on the well-being of any participant who is a minor.

Limits on isolation. Shows agree that participants who are removed to an unfamiliar environment that limits their contact with family, friends, or other important sources of support may choose one person with whom they may speak by telephone once a week for 10 minutes without penalty.

Medical care. Shows agree to provide participants with access to qualified physicians for any medical care they require during filming and to assume the costs of any care for an injury or illness that results from participation in the show. A participant who lacks confidence in the medical care he or she is receiving has the right to seek another opinion at his or her own expense without being penalized for any absence from filming.

Background checks. Shows agree to perform full background checks on participants who will reside with other participants outside their own homes and to disqualify any participant with any documented history of violence in the ten years prior to casting.

Repeat appearances. Because long-term participation has effects that short-term participation may not, shows agree that any appearance fee paid to a participant for a subsequent season of the same show must be at least three times the appearance fee for the first season in which the participant appeared. The appearance fee for subsequent seasons must be five times the original appearance fee.

Gag rules. Shows agree not to require participants to refrain from discussing their experiences in interviews subsequent to the conclusion of their participation.

Required follow-ups. Shows agree not to require participants to appear in reunion specials, follow-ups, speaking tours, or any other obligations that take place after the conclusion of principal filming.

Damage to reputation. Shows agree that their producers will participate once every three years in voting on the appointment of a three-person dispute resolution panel made up of individuals who are not employed in the production of television. Any participant who is required to sign a contract releasing a show from liability for intentional infliction of emotional distress or false light invasion of privacy has the right to bring complaints to that panel. Shows agree to provide up to three hours of raw footage requested by the complaining participant to the panel. If the panel concludes that the show materially misrepresented the participant's actions or character in a way that tends to substantially damage his or her reputation, the panel may require the show to make available online up to 30 minutes of raw footage that remedies the misrepresentation.

Incapacity. Shows agree that if a participant dies or is otherwise incapacitated while the show has in its possession any unaired footage of or referring to the person, no footage depicting or discussing the person will be shown unless the family of the person specifically requests that it be shown and no member of the person's immediate family requests that it not be shown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ethical 'Reality': A Proposed Code For Producers To Live By

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recent events surrounding reality-show participants have led to increased concern over what happens to the people who appear on these shows. It's time for the higher-end shows, quite frankly, to commit to some ethics rules that will distinguish them, and we've got a few to suggest.

# data[].attributes.body
Linda Holmes from NPR, proposes and ethics code for reality tv producers to produce in order to give participants rights and positively affect their lives. She has many suggestions one that stood out was making contracts public and accessible to the public to ensure that participants aren't being taken advantage of due to confidential contracts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Hundreds of people audition for The Voice in hopes of finding that thing every aspiring musician wants: winning a recording contract. Even though lots of things in the music industry have changed over the last 20 years, getting a record deal is still the main goal. While there are several ways to approach a record deal, competing on the reality TV show remains a popular path for many people.

There are a few reasons for this. The winner of the show gets a record deal, but they also get a $100,000 prize and all of the exposure of appearing on national television. What many people don't realize, however, is that winning a record deal on The Voice isn't exactly all that it's cracked up to be. Keep reading to learn more about what happens when a contestant wins a record deal on The Voice.

Which Label Do The Voice Winners Sign With?

When it comes to record labels, it goes without saying that not all of them are equal. The best record label for you depends on the kind of artist you are and what you want from the relationship. When it comes to The Voice, however, the winners don't have a say in which label they sign with.

All winners get a deal with Universal Music Group. The good news for contestants is that Universal is a major label with lots of resources. The bad news, however, is also that Universal is a huge label. Due to its size, it can be easy for artists to get lost in the mix of everything that's going on. Plus, while winning The Voice is a huge accomplishment, winners probably aren't prioritized as much as bigger artists.

What You Should Know About Record Deals Won From The Voice

One of the first things that are important to note about The Voice is that not all winners get the same deal. The specifics of each contract will vary from person to person. For many artists, winning a record label is a huge sign that they've made it. Unfortunately, though, many have learned that getting signed is just half the battle. This is especially true for people who get signed through avenues like The Voice. Several winners have expressed that their experience with Universal Music Group hasn't been a positive one.

Alisan Porter, who won the show in 2016, spoke openly about how getting a record deal wasn't everything it was cracked up to be. According to The New York Post, Porter said, "Once you win, they're on to the next season within two months and you're a has-been. And I was, like, terrified that I wasn't gonna use this momentum to make it in the music business. It was definitely not what I had expected."

Even the judges have also chimed in to share that they feel winners don't receive enough support from the label. Adam Levine told The Washington Post, "Record labels are - our business is the worst right now. No one knows what they're doing...The show ends, and they're like, 'Okay, they don't matter to me anymore.' ...And then it makes me feel defeated on my end because there's really not much I can do."

It's not just Adam who shares that sentiment. Blake Shelton has also been vocal about his disappointment in the way Universal has handled musicians who won recording contract on The Voice. The lack of support might explain why The Voice hasn't really produced any superstars during its time on the air. Consequently, some of the winners of The Voice have had to find ways to get out of their recording contract so that they could move forward and focus on other things. Those who do end up releasing music under Universal usually suffer from a serious lack of promotion.

Is The Voice Even Worth It?

We've established that winning a recording contract on The Voice doesn't really lead anywhere. The question then is, why would anyone waste their time doing the show? While each artist has their own reasons for wanting to compete on The Voice, the truth is that the exposure from the show can be helpful - even if the record deal isn't. Plus, the cash prize doesn't hurt either. That said, it seems like the show will eventually have issues attracting top talent if people feel like being on The Voice won't really help their journey. Hopefully, Universal decides to get it together and provide more support for winners so they can go on to have thriving careers.

Read Next: The Voice America Season 22 Finale Recap

Read next:

After nearly a quarter of a year, the 22nd season of the Voice finally concluded....

The Voice is inarguably one of the most popular singing competition shows on television. With...

Since its debut in 2011, The Voice has been one of the most popular singing...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Winning A Recording Contract on The Voice Isn't What it Seems

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Hundreds of people audition for The Voice in hopes of finding that thing every aspiring musician wants: winning a recording contract. Even though lots of things in the music industry have changed over the last 20 years, getting a record deal is still the main goal.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Camille Moore, winners and finals contestants from the voice can receive singing contracts as a result of their performances. As well as a possible contract, winners also receive $100,000.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reality TV ‘must do more to protect mental health of participants’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Psychologists call for greater regulation of reality shows to address mental health risks

# data[].attributes.body
According to Sarah Marsh from The Guardian, Psychologists and producers who have worked in reality television have warned that the industry must do more to protect participants who are being “exploited and spat out” by the experience. They also state that “The issue that was mainly raised because of Mike’s tragic death is aftercare and that is virtually non-existent in TV. For a big show like Love Island or Big Brother … I think they are often led to believe, reality contestants, or have their own expectations at the beginning of the journey that they will be successful and famous.”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
After producing television magazine programs and documentaries for 14 years in Los Angeles, I closed my production company to begin doctoral studies. One year later, Survivor debuted. As the "reality television" fad snowballed, I became curious about the ethical principles producers apply when they create "reality" television.
After producing television magazine programs and documentaries for 14 years in Los Angeles, I closed my production company to begin doctoral studies. One year later, Survivor debuted. As the "reality television" fad snowballed, I became curious about the ethical principles producers apply when they create "reality" television.

I decided to examine "reality" game and dating shows for two reasons. First, as a former producer of non-fiction programs, I was intrigued by this new generation of programs that fall at the "fiction" end of a fact/fiction continuum for viewers.1 And second, several of my former employees have been working on these shows, providing a cooperative and candid, even if non-random sample of reality television production personnel. I interviewed four producers at various levels of reality television production-an executive producer (who represents the company producing the show), a field producer (directs the on-location tapings), a supervising producer (oversees the formation of storylines), and a story editor (works with the actual tape editor to shape segments of the show).2 They were not working on the same reality show when interviewed, so the picture formed here is a composite, and not representative of a specific show.

My questions were framed by the same ethical concerns that Annette Hill suggests are important in reality television: First, that non-professional actors be treated in a fair and responsible manner, and second, that program makers present the stories of ordinary people and their experiences in an ethical manner.3

Failing to treat non-professional actors fairly can have serious consequences, especially for psychologically unsuited participants. In 1997 the first contestant banished from Expedition Robinson-the Swedish inspiration for Survivor-threw himself under a train. Richard Levak, a consulting psychologist working for Survivor, has compared the producers of some reality shows to the psychologists who ran the Stanford Prison Experiment in the early '70s. He believes that many reality TV shows would not be allowed to take place if they were overseen by the same Human Subjects Committees that guard volunteers' rights in psychological experiments.4

This was a priority, however, for the executive producer that I interviewed. An important part of his job was to prepare participants for what will happen to them, as well as to help them decompress if they are voted off the show. Furthermore, he claimed he makes it very clear to his employees that cast members should be accurately portrayed, both in taping and editing. Then perhaps acceptable ethics were being applied to the non-professional cast? When I talked with production personnel below the executive producer level, I heard a different story.

The supervising producer and the story editor I interviewed both claimed that ethical direction had never been given to them by their executive producers. Rather, they were directed to "Create entertaining stories." According to the supervising producer, this direction comes from the networks. Specifically, network representatives insist that reality shows be "cast" with characters that, when put together, will create conflict. This leads to compelling drama, they reason, and the resulting drama should deliver the escape and entertainment that viewers seek.

A former cast member from MTV's Real World told the Washington Post, "I was upset about how they portrayed me. The only thing they went after was sex. When I complained, the producers told me, 'Well, everything else was boring.'" 5 And some ex-reality show participants reported to The New York Times that producers made alcohol freely available during the tapings on several different shows, significantly affecting their behavior. To add validity to this claim, one executive producer confessed that producers of his reality show have to cut a lot of footage with slurred speech. But he said, "It just wouldn't be real if we didn't let them have (alcohol)."6

It appears that the "create entertainment" directives from the networks carry messages that contribute to show producers' ethical behavior. For example, since "conflict" is a network requirement, producers accordingly cast their shows with a volatile mix of characters. But if the casting doesn't produce the desired conflict and drama, producers know they may have to manipulate the conditions under which the cast members perform. Producers can vary the tasks and games required of show participants to build friction or, as earlier noted, they can be divulged to the press, or they can simply open the bar during tapings.

Also, producers can always heighten drama during the editing process. This "cheating footage," according to the story editor, is necessary because cast members don't always demonstrate on camera how they really feel. They can, however, usually verbalize their feelings when interviewed one-on-one by producers. So producers can manufacture scenes out of surveillance footage to visually portray the feelings discussed in the interviews. While this seems to be an ethical stretch, the producers I talked with defended their actions as necessary to tell "the whole story" when their coverage of a story element is lacking.

One of the tools used for "cheating footage" is an editing technique termed the "Franken bite." Production jargon for "Frankenstein bite," all the producers I interviewed acknowledged they used it. To them, this practice is acceptable if it depicts the character's point of view. A female cast member from Joe Millionaire claimed in the press that she was victimized by this technique. Through the creative editing of her words-which were taken from the many different days on which she was taped, and then cut into a single scene-she claims the show suggested she performed oral sex on the "millionaire."7 The field producer I interviewed was actually present during this taping and confirmed that the event did not happen as shown. Therefore, the suggestive scene was created in editing.

My interviews suggest that ethical standards to protect non-professional cast members' psychological well-being are in place. But since producers are required to make a myriad of decisions during the production process, it is surprising they mostly operate without ethical direction from their superiors. The networks want entertainment on these programs, so the opportunity exists for an individual's ethical standards to be crowded out by pragmatic considerations for audience stimulation and successful ratings. The ultimate portrayal of cast members on a reality show appears to be left to the discretion of different production personnel going about their work to "Create interesting stories."
Notes
1 See Annette Hill's extensive analysis in Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television. New York: Routledge, 2005, p 178.

2 The work of these reality TV producers includes shows like Big Brother, Amazing Race, The Family, Joe Millionaire, Brat Camp, and The Surreal Life.

3 See Hill, p. 108.

4 Levak, Richard. "The Dangerous Reality of Reality Television." Television Week, 2003 September 22: 14.

5 Farhi, Paul. "The Spin on 'Real World,'" Washington Post, 1999 Nov 4: C1.

6 Fletcher, Heather. "Drink Up. It's Not Like You Have Lines to Learn." The New York Times. 2006 Oct 29, late ed., sec. 2: 32.

7 Olson, Lee. "Everything Old Is New," The Reality of Reality. Bravo television channel, Sept. 2003.
Richard Crew is an associate professor and chair of the Communications Department of College Misericordia (Dallas, PA). Education and scholarship are his second careers, as he first was a documentary television producer, next a television manager, and then the executive producer of several national television programs, all prior to earning his Ph.D. He recently contributed a study on audience opinions of Survivor to a book titled How Real is Reality TV? He may be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. The above article was published in Media Ethics, Spring 2007 (18:2), pp.10,19.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Ethics of Reality Television Producers - mediaethicsmagazine.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After producing television magazine programs and documentaries for 14 years in Los Angeles, I closed my production company to begin doctoral studies. One year later, Survivor debuted. As the "reality television" fad snowballed, I became curious about the ethical principles producers apply when they create "reality" television.

# data[].attributes.body
This article says Reality TV producers have been known to cast individuals who are likely to create drama and "beef". This approach generates heightened emotions and conflicts among participants, resulting in more engaging content. The result of casting these provocative personalities can disregard the potential negative effects on the mental well-being of those individuals can negatively affect the well being of those personalities and the people around them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Though the TV show Unreal is fictitious - a dystopian look into the lives of producers on reality shows like The Bachelor - it's a program that raises questions about the morality, ethics and manipulation behind the dazzling mirage of reality tv.

On Unreal, producers use any means necessary to climb the ladder of success. They feed their contestants alcohol, storylines, and lies to manipulate them into following a character arc created for them. They label contestants "heroes" or "villains" or "love interests" and plot their romances. And they have no sense of guilt for doing it. It's the stuff of nightmares.

But how close does that come to real life?

We asked a producer that question - granted anonymity for obvious reasons - who has worked for over a decade in the Australian reality TV business.

Short answer: "It is 100% manipulated."
VICE: So you were saying that the archetypes of villain and hero actually exist and people are cast in those roles.
Yeah, the archetypes definitely exist, they build it around them. We'll say, 'Okay, so this person, we're going to be keeping around for a while because they're going to be a villain, and there'll be good television'.

Say you're doing Bachelor or Bachelorette, it is ultimately up to the person who's picking whether they stick around, but they will have their own producer who will be like, 'Hey, maybe just keep them around for another episode'. And then they'll get rid of someone who's boring and who's not really getting any airtime.

For example, when you're watching The Bachelorette, like Brooke Blurton's season, and they've got an absolute douchebag who everybody's like, 'Why the fuck is she keeping him on the show?' That's because a producer or executive producer has been like, 'Hey, we just need to keep them around for a few more episodes'. So they're playing along as well.
Oh, so the person that's the bachelor or the bachelorette is just acting as well.
Yeah, well, some of them go rogue, like Honey Badger. He went absolutely off script. He was taking his mic off and telling girls things he shouldn't have been. But basically, when you get cast on these shows, it's been decided who you are going to be from the beginning. I know that people say that in reality TV that we manipulate the edit. That's true. Like, we can give you a hero or a villain cut. It's a lot easier to give someone the hero cut, it's harder to give someone the villain cut because you still need to do the dodgy shit. You still need to look like an ass, you still need to say the bad shit. So if people come and go, 'I wasn't happy with how I was portrayed on this show'. They still had to have been an asshole.

But I was actually meeting with my writing partner the other day, and she was telling me a story about there being a contestant who was a bit of a douchebag. He came across like a villain. And they were like, 'Great, we're gonna portray him as a villain'. That's what we wanted. He tried to, in a cute way, grab his partner that he was dating and pull her onto her lap, just in a cute playful way. But she was shocked by it. Not for any untoward reason, just she didn't expect it. So she pulled away. And it was just after she'd been on a date with another guy. So the way that it's been edited and gone out, it looks like he's grabbed her out of anger.
So do the contestants know that they're being cast as heroes or villains?
No. And they have no idea who they are going to be. Part of my job when I meet them is to basically become their best friend. Straight away. And normally, one of the first things you do before you start doing anything else is you do a master interview. The master interview would be like, we'd sit down in a chair for an hour, two hours, sometimes more, and basically, I'll just ask you questions about yourself, but I'll try to keep it like a conversation.

And then if you reveal something like, 'I've had a really tough time, my mom has cancer'. I'll go and reveal something about myself, like, 'Oh, yeah, my mom actually had ovarian cancer, I know exactly what you're going through. It's so tough'. And then we build this relationship where they start to trust me.

So I'll say stuff to you off camera with no mics on and get their actual thoughts because they're always like, 'Oh, man, I don't know, I don't think that she's my type or he's the biggest douchebag I've ever met'. And then they won't say that on camera. And then you'll go like, 'Oh, come on, so what do you actually think about them?'

I had one contestant admit that he didn't like his date because she was Asian...When I left the room, he went to my camera operator and said, "Oh, fuck. Oh, fuck. No. I thought I was just talking to a man. Am I fucked?" And the camera guy is like, 'Nah, man, they're probably never going to use that'. But it's reality TV, so of course they're gonna use it.
I feel like one of the biggest things people think about producers is that they are manipulative. Do you ever feel morally conflicted about that?
Only when they're actually good people. The problem is when you get the hero characters who were actually douchebags. So I had a hero once, but basically, he was an absolute scumbag. I only feel bad when you've got nice people who your bosses are going to stir up some shit with. I actually like these people and I don't want them to look like idiots on TV. I don't want to ruin their lives.

But when we get a misogynist who is talking about how women need to be subservient to men. And how he likes Latina women because they know their place, then I'm like, 'Yeah, no, no, give me him. I'm gonna get his date to like, fucking throw a glass of water in his face'. I'm gonna make him look like the biggest douchebag. I'm excited to do that. But someone who's just, a bit dumb, a bit innocent, but we can make look like a bad person - because that's what the bosses want - then I feel bad about that.
So do people come on already with their own constructed storylines? And does it work out?
Usually not, unless they're actually good at doing it. A lot of people come onto a reality show and think, 'I know that I'm gonna get manipulated'. There's that idea that the producer's manipulating you but they think, 'I'm smart, and I'm going to manipulate it in my favour'. Trust me, no matter how smart you are, you don't know the tricks. I've been in TV for a long time. I guarantee you I know more about how to get you to do what I want. Because you've never been in front of a camera before, you don't know the tricks that we have.
You're very open about how much manipulation there is. It's kind of refreshing.
Oh yeah, well, we call a group of producers a manipulation.

As a joke, yeah.
Have you ever seen something that another producer has done and it's been a bit questionable?
Yeah, it's not normally another producer. It's normally executives. It's people who have a lot of power. We have a lot of power as producers whether it's to get you filmed in a certain way, or get certain grabs from you. Try to make you look good. Try to make you look bad. But ultimately, the story power all goes to the executives and the networks. And if a network or an executive tells you to go down a bad route, that's the route you've got to go down.

It is uncomfortable, manipulating people that don't want to be together, making sure they're together and it's two people who genuinely have no connection and genuinely don't want to give this thing a shot. And cool, we're forcing them together.
So if someone's a bad person do you give them a bad storyline?
Look, don't get me wrong, there's 100% manipulation... but if you've done something wrong behind the scenes, you're more likely to get manipulated really badly. If you were lovely behind the scenes - I'm just speaking from personal experience and from the producers that I respect - we're gonna have a real struggle trying to make you look bad. Because we do care about them. Some of them. Some of them you're just like, 'You're a piece of shit. And I want to ruin you'.
Have you ever heard of a contestant that was given a villain arc, and then has had trouble after the show?
I mean, none of them have contacted me after the fact. None that I've personally produced. But yeah, I've seen those stories where people are like, 'Oh, you fucked up my mental health. People hated me. That's not how I really was'. But the problem is, you did do those things.

Now, in the edit, we've probably exaggerated it to be more than what it is. Like we do franken-grabs. Basically a franken-grab is a way of editing but we're not misrepresenting them. People think, "Oh, franken-grabs, they can make us say anything they want". And the issue with reality TV is that it is 100% manipulated, there are storylines, there are plans, but it is still unscripted. So people don't speak in concise sound bites, and that means that we need to condense it down in the edit. And that's why we use franken-grabs. So the franken grabs are still the exact same thing that they were saying or were implying or. But we've condensed it to make it more concise so that it can actually make a storyline in a TV arc.
So when you get into the editing suite, there hasn't been an instance where you've totally constructed a conversation?
I haven't. No. But I know that other people have. It's not that easy. It is actually quite difficult to try to make something where there is nothing. I know that it's happened. I know people who have done it. I have not done it. Although, I also think that it's just laziness. I think that's laziness from post-production.
So you'd say it's better talking to them in real time and making them say things and then editing?
I mean, if you get a good field producer, then yeah. But sometimes you don't get that. And the problem is, you've got like six people producing different contestants. So there's not a singular voice there who's in charge to keep the tone all the same.
Have you ever seen the TV show
Unreal is an exaggerated version of what is real, but it is surprisingly accurate. It's set more in a bygone era before the public was so aware of the role of a producer or the manipulation that we do. Nowadays, it's a bit more thoughtful and less evil. There's definitely moral and ethical issues with what we do. Because even if you watch reality TV back in like the early 2000s/2010s, it's gotten tamer.

From what I understand they've done the research and in Australia, we don't particularly want that gross exploitative stuff anymore, like the really really fucked shit. You don't want to see the turkey slap from Big Brother anymore. There is more care about the mental health and well being of the contestants, but I would say nowhere near as much as there should be.
Follow Julie Fenwick on Twitter and Instagram. Read more from VICE Australia and subscribe to our weekly newsletter, This Week Online. Unreal? Is being a producer similar to that?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'There's 100% Manipulation': The Inner Workings of Reality TV, According to a Producer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Though the TV show Unreal is fictitious - a dystopian look into the lives of producers on reality shows like The Bachelor - it's a program that raises questions about the morality, ethics and manipulation behind the dazzling mirage of reality tv. On Unreal, producers use any means necessary to climb the ladder of success.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Source: MTV

People have loved reality TV for decades, and even though many shows are edited or scripted, viewership is still high. Why do people love reality TV so much?

No matter what your feelings are regarding reality TV and the kind of "trash" that makes its way into the genre, chances are you've watched a reality TV show at some point. There are reality dating shows, physical competition series, talent shows, and everything in between. These days, there's no getting around them on network television and streaming platforms alike. But why do people love reality TV so much?

The quickest answer is that it's easy TV to watch after a long day of work. It's virtually mindless entertainment, and to some, it's equivalent to scrolling through social media or TikTok when you want to shut off parts of your brain. That doesn't mean it's a bad thing.

But Distractify spoke with some mental health experts to better understand why so many of us are so attached to reality TV over scripted television.

Source: Bravo

'Reality TV' viewers live vicariously through reality shows.

Attorney, author, and media commentator Dr. Wendy Patrick, J.D., M.Div., Ph.D., told Distractify she believes it's "much more interesting" for people to watch the real lives of people on shows like The Real Housewives or Mob Wives and learn how they live, which is typically very different from the viewer.

"Reality television provides an easy, and legal, way to peer into the lives of others," she said. "Over the last few decades, reality TV has become a staple of modern entertainment in households around the world." Essentially, it's like a much jucier version of stalking your favorite celebs on Instagram.

Psychologist Dr. Eva M. Krockow agreed that those who watch reality TV may sometimes feel like they can live through the people they're watching. Subjects in different reality shows often live exciting lives - and even the negative things that people go through on reality television aren't happening to the viewer, which they can take comfort in.

"In a way, you can feel like you are benefiting from their life experiences without having to endure negative aspects of [them]," she explained. "This might be particularly appealing to people who are naturally more risk-averse or less extroverted."

Reality TV can promote healthy discussions about human behavior.

There are some benefits of watching reality TV, even if it seems like the least high-brow of all genres. Dr. Krockow said that reality TV shows often open the floor for dialogue about human behavior.

She explained that by watching contestants make poor decisions, viewers develop their own opinions or thoughts while studying them in different situations. Therefore, Dr. Krockow said, reality television "may offer material for critical discussion and even soul-searching."

Source: Netflix

Most people who watch reality dating shows know what they're getting.

Dr. Patrick shared that people watch dating reality shows in particular "because they do not represent reality." She added that "staged courtships and marriage proposals are often both endearing and entertaining," even if not everyone who watches them view reality dating shows as somewhat fabricated.

Documentaries are a more educational sub-genre of reality media.

Whether you love reality TV or its something you don't quite understand, documentaries or docuseries may be one of the last forms that is rooted more in reality. Think about it - documentaries often offer a similar window into the lives of real people, accessible from the comfort of your own home.

"Documentaries are one genre of reality TV that is educational, interesting, and entertaining," Dr. Patrick told Distractify.

As with most things involving the human mind, people's love of reality TV isn't as simple as assuming they crave trashy television or want to turn their brain off. It can be much more engaging and though-provoking than the stigmas against it would have you believe. Though, to be fair, who doesn't love to unwind with some sweet, sweet reality Kardashian drama?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Experts Weigh in on Why People Are So Obsessed With Reality TV

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
People have loved reality TV for decades, and even though many shows are edited or scripted, viewership is still high. Why do people love reality TV so much? No matter what your feelings are regarding reality TV and the kind of "trash" that makes its way into the genre, chances are you've watched a reality TV show at some point.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Dr. Wendy Patrick "Reality television provides an easy, and legal, way to peer into the lives of others. Over the last few decades, reality TV has become a staple of modern entertainment in households around the world. Essentially, it's like a much jucier version of stalking your favorite celebs on Instagram."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why do we love reality TV shows so much? | Ready Steady Cut

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From talent shows to dating shows, have you ever really thought about why reality TV is so addictive? There’s science behind it, read here for more.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Max Gruber from ready steady cut,  reality TV creates a way to legally stalk the personal lives of celebrities and in a way live their life and enjoy the good things without having to experience the bad.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Oxford Languages and Google - English | Oxford Languages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Google's English dictionary is provided by Oxford Languages. Oxford Languages is the world's leading dictionary publisher, with over 150 years of experience creating and delivering authoritative dictionaries globally in more than 50 languages.

# data[].attributes.body
Reality tv is defined as "television programes in which ordinary people are continuously filmed, designed to be entertaining rather than informative."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We can say that reality TV shows are many people's guilty pleasure. While some watch them just because they like the drama or wish to keep their minds off problems, some genuinely relate with the reality TV stars.

Whatever the reason may be, reality TV shows are very popular, and it's difficult not to know about some reality celebrities, such as Kim Kardashian. Furthermore, reality TV is proven to be quite influential.

We've compiled the top reality TV statistics-everything from how much of TV is reality programming to how much money reality stars make. They will help you understand how prevalent reality TV is, what people think about it, and how it can impact our society.

It's been a lot of work, but we think it's worth it. Because we're all about bringing you the most interesting data in the world. It's what we do-and there's no better way to prove that than by showing you what we've got!

Top Stats and Facts About Reality TV (Editor's Choice)

Nearly four in ten people watch some form of reality TV.

34% of Australians who watch reality TV lie about it.

14% of adult males compared their life to the life of a reality TV star.

27% of Americans aged 18 to 29 felt inspired by a reality TV celebrity.

The key demographic for reality TV shows are women aged between 18 and 34.

50% of survey respondents aged 16 to 24 with different levels of reality TV consumption reported that reality TV shows affected their body image.

38 people have committed suicide after becoming reality TV celebrities.

18% of survey respondents think such shows are mostly unscripted.

Only 7% of adults claim reality TV shows represent American society well.

Global Reality TV Statistics

Almost four in ten people watch some form of reality TV shows.

(SWLondoner)

Reality TV shows are one of the most profitable sectors of the TV industry, and many theories explain why. For example, the Social Comparison Theory indicates that people watching such TV shows make them feel better about their own lives. Of course, this isn't the only reason why people are interested in reality TV.

The contestants on a reality show called Dancing With The Stars can make about $10,000 to $50,000 per week.

(The Things)

Reality TV pay rates for some shows are almost unbelievable. For instance, Dancing With The Stars pays the contestants $125,000 only for signing up to compete and $10,000 for the next two episodes. Finally, they're paid $50,000 for the appearance in the last two episodes of the season.

Simon Cowell, an American Idol judge, has a salary of $36 million per season.

(The Things)

Everyone knows Simon Cowell. Apart from being very popular, he is the highest-paid judge in the history of American Idol. He is paid a shocking $36 million per season. Of course, most judges in this reality TV show are already well-known artists, so it isn't very surprising that their salaries are exorbitant.

34% of Australians who watch reality TV lie about it.

(Reviews)

According to how many people watch reality TV statistics from 2021, 34% of those who watch reality TV lie about it, and 74% do so because they feel ashamed. Moreover, 66% said they left a room to watch a reality TV show alone.

83% of Australians who watch Reality TV dating shows watch Married At First Sight Australia.

(Reviews)

66% of Australians admitted to watching reality TV dating TV shows, and the most popular is Married At First Sight Australia. Apart from that, 51% of viewers prefer The Bachelor Australia, 39% The Bachelorette Australia, while 33% watch Love Island.

1.5 billion votes were cast on Big Brother Brasil's tenth eviction night in 2020.

(BBC)

Reality TV statistics from 2020 reveal that, on the tenth eviction night of Big Brother Brasil, a record-breaking 1.5 billion votes were cast. It's important to mention that viewers were allowed to vote multiple times. Also, this episode had a viewing share of 51% in São Paulo and 55% in Rio de Janeiro.

Season 2 of The Circle was watched on around 14 million accounts for at least two minutes in the first 28 days of its release.

(Cnet)

Netflix has become much more open about its viewership during the last two years. According to their official reports, season 2 of a social experiment reality program named The Circle was watched on approximately 14 million accounts for at least two minutes in the first 28 days of its release.

In 2018, the second most-watched TV genre in Australia was Reality TV.

(Roy Morgan)

Roy Morgan's reality television statistics indicate that reality TV was watched by 41% of Australians in 2018. The only genre that was watched more than reality TV was news. Unsurprisingly, reality tv was more popular among women, but 37% of men also watched it.

54% of the UK survey respondents think that people who go on reality TV know what they've signed up for.

(YouGov)

YouGov's survey from 2018 reveals that more than half of survey respondents think that those who decide to participate in reality TV shows know what they're getting themselves into. On the contrary, the same reality shows statistics point out that 25% of respondents have the opposite opinion.

45% of the UK survey respondents who are familiar with Love Island would totally support including homosexual contestants.

(YouGov)

It appears that a lot of UK viewers would be fine with Including bisexual, homosexual, or asexual contestants in Love Island. Also, reality TV viewership statistics reveal that 54% of viewers said they would totally support including people with physical disabilities in this reality show.

19% of the UK survey respondents who are familiar with Love Island are entirely against support including homosexual contestants.

(YouGov)

Unfortunately, almost 20% of survey respondents of all age and genders are against including homosexual contestants in Love Island, while 18% oppose including

bisexual contestants. Furthermore, 10% of respondents are entirely against including physically disabled contestants.

Reality TV Viewer Demographics

36% of those aged 30 to 49 watched reality TV shows in 2021.

(Statista)

Demographics of reality TV viewers in the US point out that reality TV shows were the most popular among those aged between 30 and 49. Still, other age groups don't fall behind. While 32% of viewers aged 18 to 29 watched reality TV shows, 31% of those aged 50 to 64 years did.

14% of male adults compared their life to the life of a reality TV star.

(Morning Consult)

According to who watches reality TV statistics based on a 2018 survey, males are less likely to compare their life to the lives of reality TV stars (19% of female viewers do). This data also reveals that viewers aged 18 to 29 are most likely to compare their lives to the reality stars they see on TV.

61% of female American adults have a very unfavorable impression of the reality TV show named Keeping Up with the Kardashians.

(Morning Consult)

Even though the target audience for Keeping Up with the Kardashians are female, stats on reality TV indicate that 61% have a very unfavorable impression of it. Interestingly, only 18% of people aged 18 to 29 have a very favorable impression of that show.

The key demographic for reality TV shows are women aged 18 to 34.

(Central Bronco Beat)

It's not surprising that the target audience for reality TV shows are women. Reality TV programs are considered a replacement for soap operas, which also target women. Reality TV shows have become more popular because they're much more dramatized than soap operas. Still, some viewers don't like too much drama because it seems scripted.

75% of girls think that competition reality shows are mostly real and unscripted.

(Girl Scouts)

Who watches reality tv demographics reveal that a majority of girls who are reality TV viewers think competition reality TV shows are mostly real. Also, 50% claim that real-life shows are mainly real and unscripted.

Negative Effects of Reality TV Statistics

50% of survey respondents aged 16 to 24 with different levels of reality TV consumption admitted that reality shows affected their body image.

(SWLondoner)

Reality TV shows can influence the way young people (especially girls) perceive their bodies. Apart from that, more than 55% of respondents of the same age admitted that they weren't aware of the potential psychological effects of reality TV programs.

60% of survey respondents said that other viewers are more aggressive, argumentative, irritable, self-centered, and anxious.

(SWLondoner)

Some shocking reality TV statistics from a survey point out that 40% of respondents said that they didn't notice any changes in their behavior after watching reality TV. Still, 60% claimed that they noticed others were more aggressive, irritable, egoistic, and anxious.

38 people have committed suicide after becoming famous reality TV stars.

(Metro)

According to reality TV show statistics, 38 famous reality TV stars committed suicide and their death is connected to participation in reality TV shows. Apparently, many people can't cope with sudden fame, trolls, and haters. That's why all reality TV participants should take extra care of their mental health.

78% of girls who watch reality TV think that gossiping is a normal part of a relationship among girls.

(Girl Scouts)

There are significant differences between girls who watch reality TV and those who don't, proving that such shows can have a role of inspiration and a learning tool for getting involved in social causes. For example, while 78% of reality TV viewers think that gossiping between girls is normal, only 54% of non-viewers do.

37% of girls who watch reality TV think they have to lie to get what they want, while 24% of non-viewers think so.

(Girl Scouts)

Reality TV shows facts and stats reveal that reality TV viewers expect and accept more drama, bullying, and aggression in their own lives. Therefore, it's evident that reality TV has a powerful impact on girls and their behavior, opinions, and values.

27% of Americans aged 18 to 29 felt inspired by a reality TV star.

(Life Beyond Numbers)

Even though 27% of American adults aged between 18 and 29 felt inspired by a reality TV celebrity, watching reality TV can hinder their academic performance and lead to real-life accidents and even death.

Kids who watch reality TV tend to be more violent and manipulative.

(Deccan Herald)

Children who are exposed to reality TV may perceive the behavior of participants as cool and that wealth, popularity, and good looks are major sources of happiness. That's why children can start imitating what they see on TV and might try to use violence to solve problems.

Other Interesting Stats and Facts on Reality TV Shows

61% of people think reality TV shows are mostly scripted.

(Statista)

Statista's reality TV data from 2018 reveals that over 60% of American adults think reality shows are mostly scripted. On the contrary, 18% of survey respondents believe such shows are largely unscripted.

72% of American adults think that reality TV shows are fake, while 60% claim they're trashy.

(Statista)

Most American adults describe reality TV shows as fake, trashy, meaningless, and predictable. Still, some people find it entertaining, inspiring, and even intellectual (19% of American adults see reality TV shows as intellectual).

Only 7% of American adults think reality TV shows represent their society well.

(Morning Consult)

One of the interesting facts about reality TV is that some people claim reality TV shows represent American society well. Still, they account for only 7% of American adults. On the contrary, 44% strongly disagree with that statement.

So far, the UK's reality show called Love Island has led to four marriages and five babies.

(Wales Online)

UK Reality TV statistics show that Love Island is the most successful dating reality TV show. Furthermore, the participants of Love Island UK are most likely to get married and have children.

Aside from that, Netflix's reality TV show, Love is Blind, has the highest dating success rate, as 33% of the couples are still together even after filming has ended.

Related Questions

What percent of the population watches reality TV?

As statistics show, a lot of people watch TV. For example, a survey has found that 36% of Americans aged between 30 and 49 years watch reality TV shows, while 32% of those aged 18 to 29 do. The older generations aren't far behind, as 31% of people aged 50 to 64 watch reality TV programs.

Does reality TV affect mental health?

Even if reality TV shows might seem entirely harmless, their behavioral effects remain relatively unknown. Still, people who watch those programs that show toxic behavior can become more aggressive, manipulative, and narcissistic. That's probably because such shows are marketed as reality.

Why is reality TV so addictive?

According to Dr. Tobias-Webb, reality TV shows are addictive because they're exciting. They increase heart rate and lead to the release of endorphins in our brains. That's not very different from the effect of certain drug addictions. Like every other addiction, people build up tolerance in time and need to watch more to create the same thrilling effect.

Is reality TV the most popular genre?

No, at least not in the US. According to Statista's data from 2017 based on the genre breakdown of the most popular TV programs, reality and participatory shows are in third place. The most popular genre is drama, while documentaries are the least popular.

Does reality TV affect society?

Yes. Unfortunately, many reality TV shows promote unhealthy relationships, irresponsible behavior, and the degradation of family values. Viewers are influenced by such behaviors and might mimic them because they see them as socially acceptable.

Who is the target audience for reality TV?

The key demographic for reality TV shows are women aged between 18 to 34, because women are more likely to watch such shows. According to reality TV statistics, women aged 18 to 49 are the target audience for soap operas. However, it seems that reality TV shows and social media platforms will replace them.

Conclusion

Watching reality TV shows isn't entirely harmless, especially for the younger audience. Still, young people are the most likely to watch them. Moreover, participating in reality TV shows can also have many detrimental effects. Still, the popularity of reality TV is undeniable, and it seems like reality TV shows are here to stay.

Of course, it's okay to watch a few episodes just for fun or to be up to date with the latest trends, but seeing the behavior of reality TV stars shouldn't be seen as socially acceptable. Therefore, watching reality TV in moderation and not comparing yourself with a reality TV star seems fine.

After looking at these statistics about reality TV, it's clear that this genre has a lot to offer. Looking back on the figures we saw, we can see that reality TV is more popular than ever. And there are many different kinds of reality TV shows out there for fans to choose from.

There's also the fact that reality TV appeals to a wide range of people all over the world. Whether you're a fan of music and dance shows or cooking competitions, there's probably a reality show out there for you to enjoy.

So what do you think? Are you ready to watch some more reality TV?
23 Binge-Watching Statistics You Should Know 18 Anime Fan Base Statistics To Sink Your Teeth Into How Does Netflix Make Money? Business Model of Netflix

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
27 Reality TV Statistics That Might Surprise You | Soocial

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We can say that reality TV shows are many people's guilty pleasure. While some watch them just because they like the drama or wish to keep their minds off problems, some genuinely relate with the reality TV stars.

# data[].attributes.body
The targeted audience for reality TV shows are women aged between 18 and 34.

# data[].attributes.body
ITV suggest there are ways to better the experience of participants in reality tv shows. Some of these include preparing the participants for the affects publicity may have on them and the scrutiny they may face, the affects it ay have on their lives post production, and offering support systems if they struggle in any of these or other aspects as a result of their participation.

# data[].attributes.body
This resource supplies a list of celebrities who have accredited their fame to their experience in reality tv. some of these people include Kim Kardashian, Bear Grylls, Emma Stone

# data[].attributes.body
An anonymous producer when interviewed by Vice Magazines Julie Fenwick says Reality TV is 100% manipulated and there are storylines that the producer creates and due to it being unscripted can pull sound bites in order to portray someone as being something they are not for views.