Chris also finds another reason why Big brother is such a success:
“When there’s a flash of anger, it’s not make-believe, it’s real”
This helps us understand why there is so many supporters for Big Brother. Because it is real. There is no fake tears with onions, no bad acting, it is all real. This is how you will expect humans to react to the given situation. When Zoë and Jeanie fight in a crowded pub, we ask how can 2 people do that to one another? That is an unrealistic approach. When 2 people fight in a crowded house in Big Brother, we say now that’s how people react in given situations!
The article also states that not only social groups D and E watch the programme. According to him, his friend, who is 30 and is Oxford-educated with a high job is inviting up to 15 people so they can see the show.
John Humphys, writing for the Daily Mail, disagrees. He argues that Reality TV shows such as Big Brother is “damaging society” on various basis. He claims that although soaps like Eastenders and Coronation Street does have similar content, the fact they are acting takes it all away. He goes on saying that shows like Big Brother make the point that it is real so you cannot hide behind their disgusting behavior that it is only acting.
He claims:
“Reality television erodes the distinction
between the public and the private”
This is true. Big Brother boasts that nothing is hidden from the viewer. That is the aim of Big Brother after all, but Humphrys argues that our ability to keep things private is an important part of our culture. If we take away the private things and turn them into public, each and everyone of us would turn into a laughing stock. There is some things you do privately, like crack stupid jokes or be more critical of certain things, and there are tings you do publicly, like crack good jokes, and be more understanding to other people’s views.
He also stats his worries of the direction TV is taking:
“The way to get ratings is to get evil”
He is stating the current way the programmes are now getting their viewers. He goes on to say that now those people are not interested in how society is affected, all they care about is getting money. And if that relies on getting evil and damaging society even more, so be it.
Humphrys comments on the way the celebrity system works. It used to be that television helped right people to be rightly famous and the newspapers turned them into celebrities. However “Now television creates and celebrates its own celebrities”. He is telling us that TV are choosing their own celebrities or heroes and does not care how they act. In fact an idiot would be regarded as a celebrity on TV because his idiocy was what made him famous.
I have to fall on John Humphrys side here, although Chris Blackhurst does make some good points. I believe that trash such as Big Brother does not belong on TV and has no interest for the public apart from gross humor. I am appalled that Chris Blackhurst is glad to see the show encourage voyeurism. Voyeurism is spying/stalking, no matter what fans of Big Brother say, and spying on people is a criminal offense.
I do agree with the fact Chris Blackhurst points out; that we see this every day with soaps, comedies and even in the news. We do see, to a certain extent, images and content similar to Big Brother. But the difference between the two are clear and here I fully agree with John Humphrys. Soaps are not real. So aren’t movies involving monsters That is simple enough to believe. How did you get over monsters destroying armies, zombies eating humans and vampires turning into bats? You told yourself it wasn’t real and all this was only Hollywood trying to get a bit of money. It is the same with soaps. The way people get over them, and the way children do not suffer from the soaps is by being told they are fake and just people acting. But now, that excuse is wiped out with the introduction of Realism TV namely Big Brother. Now you cannot tell your children or even yourself that the despicable behavior is simply acting because it is not. It is real people doing what people in Eastenders are doing and that is the scary thing.
I also agree with John Humphrys stance about the new direction TV is going to. Big Brother has only encouraged that and a time when there is only shows like Big Brother on TV might come sooner, if producers believe they decide that a good audience and hence a good rating is a shocked audience. And if we become used to Big Brother, it will not become shocking anymore, and we will need more disgusting behavior to satisfy our demands.
I believe that filth should not be shown on TV, no matter what social groups D and E say. If these groups manage to convenience members of higher classes to watch filth then that is highly dangerous. I would support a ban on Big Brother and it’s cohorts along with a limit in what soaps and other TV programmes can show.
