Explore how reality TV exploits the proletariat

by robynrumball99outlookcom (student)

Reality TV exploits the proletariat

The proletariat audience is exploited by reality television through the way in which the shows influence the audience. The exploitation mainly comes from the name of the genre. Referring to the genre as ‘reality’ gives the audience a false sense of truth towards the programme. The idea of the show being a reality causes the audience to believe that it is real life that they are watching when a lot of the time; it is not a true representation of real life at all.

Criticisms of reality TV also suggest that the genre is in place to exploit and humiliate the participants. It is a way in which the television industry is able to make celebrities out of people who really have no talent at all. Through these ‘reality’ programmes, the production companies are able to glamourise the vulgarity that they convey to the audience. Film maker and theorist, Gary Oldman is amongst critics of the reality genre who describes the genre as “the museum of social decay.” This links to the idea of the proletariat being exposed to the false reality that is the Reality TV genre. The social decay is the idea that the audience is being brainwashed by the false reality that they see. It causes them to believe that what they are consuming is in fact reality rather than glamourised events which exploit those partaking in the programme.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Geordie Shore is a prime example of the exploitation of the proletariat through the consumption of reality TV. Although the show is actually ‘structured reality’ which would suggest that the events are put into a scripted situation but without scripted dialogue, it still conveys a false sense of reality for the viewer. The target audience for the show would also be 18 to 30 year olds, in demographic grading’s of C2 and below. This target audience are likely to be vulnerable to consuming the show as a real life reality show. Levi Strauss’ theory on binary oppositions would apply to Geordie Shore because of the binary opposites within the show. A key binary opposite is the men and women. Although all housemates are from Newcastle and all behave in equally vulgar ways, the way in which they are viewed for their behaviour are very different because of their gender. For example, the female housemates will often flash their naked bodies or on nights out they will wear a lot of makeup and very revealing outfits. The men will also flash nudity and dress up for nights out, but the judgement they get for doing so is very different than the way the women are judged. 5 years on since the first episode aired, the housemates are now reality TV stars and whilst they are all successful in their own ways, it seems as though the ordeals from the past still hang over the females whilst not so much over the men. On screen sex is very common in Geordie Shore and it is clear that the women are still answering for their actions years later, whilst the men seem to have been excused from their behaviour on the show. This causes the proletariat audience to have different exceptions and expectations dependent on gender. The way in which the men reacted on the show after the females partaking in one night stands is evidently different from the way in which the women reacted to the men’s actions. The women in the show seemed to just accept that the men going out and sleeping with numerous women was normal and a reality. Whereas the men would seem offended and degrade the women for doing the same. This causes the audience to oppress the female housemates much more for doing the exact same thing as the men. This exploits the proletariat as they consume the idea that men can do vulgar things and not be oppressed as the women are. This takes advantage of the way in which the audience subconsciously consume the views and beliefs that are being put on them by the show.

Another way in which the proletariat is exploited by the show is through the way in which the housemates look. Their image creates an unrealistic reality for the viewers and it causes the viewers to become numb to the idea that this kind of look is normal and achievable. Both the men and women in the show create unrealistic expectations for the viewer. Journalist and theorist, Charlie Brooker, highlights the way in which the male reality stars look, stating “They've got sculpted physiques, sculpted hairdos, sculpted eyebrows, and as far as I can tell, no skin pores.” This statement helps to highlight the way in which pressure is put on the young proletariat because of the look of the individuals seen on these reality programmes. Obviously the partaking housemates have been made to look idealistic and attractive by the production organisation in order to be people that the audience will want to watch. However, this causes many issues in the young viewers and can cause them to be self-conscious and some may even take paths to attempt to achieve these unrealistic looks. The idea of some of the cast mates having ‘no skin pores’ conveys the way in which the show and its individuals are fake and not realistic appearances or lifestyles for the proletariat to aspire to.

The exploitation of the proletariat audience through reality TV is the reality of the genre. With the way in which the proletariat is vulnerable to being exploited by the shows, there is no end to the way in which ‘reality’ TV can alter the beliefs and values of the viewer through their texts’ content. There is little to no limit of what can be broadcasted as long as it is deemed ‘reality’ which causes conflict and misunderstanding amongst an audience who knows no different than to believe what they are consuming.