Reality shows create excitement among people, it is a good way of entertainment.
Debate Rounds (3)
I'm pleased that my first debate on this site will be with someone else who is just starting out too. Good luck to you :)
As I see it, you've made two claims: 1. Reality shows are a good means of entertainment; and 2. Reality shows are a good way of furthering one's career. I will address them in that order.
1. I contend that reality TV is not a good means of entertainment, for several reasons. Firstly, it is degrading to individuals. These shows are often accused, by media analysts and critics, of being set up for the purpose of humiliating their contestants for the cheap entertainment of the masses, and I personally have to agree. Think about it honestly. These shows aren't just giving people a shot at success, they're publicly advertising the failures of the majority of contestants, such as the failed attempts of people auditioning for Idol. Shows like Big Brother deliberately provoke disputes between housemates on a regular basis for the satisfaction of viewers.
If you want an insight into the human condition I recommend you read Shakespeare or Sophocles, some moral philosophy, or papers on the findings of modern psychology. Reality TV gives people the sense that they're gaining a glimpse into the human condition but in fact they're watching other people inevitably embarrass themselves so they can feel better about their own imperfect lives. Reality TV is hardly representative of actual reality, it deliberately brings out the worst in people in unrealistic circumstances.
Reality TV is also a heavily exploited medium for subtle advertising. Product placement on reality TV shows is a multi-billion dollar industry. Source: http://promomagazine.com...
I personally feel that reality TV is effectively 'dumbing-down' our society as a whole. It's bad enough in my country of Australia, but I imagine it's quite a lot worse in the US. If you ask random people on the street, I'm willing to bet more people will be able to tell you the winners of the past few seasons of Big Brother than can give you any information about current major world events. I even bet that around the time of an election more people will be able to name the final few remaining contestants on a variety of reality TV shows running at the time than could name the potential leaders for their country, let alone describe their positions on various issues.
2. Reality shows are an unreliable and unrealistic way of launching one's career. I will give a few examples of circumstances in which contestants were deliberately misled during their participation in their respective shows.
- The winner of the first season of America's Next Top Model, Adrianne Curry, claimed during an interview that all contestants were repeatedly promised a huge cosmetics deal with Revlon, including billboard and magazine photo shoots, if they won. After winning the competition, Adrianne says she was shortchanged and only offered minor convention work, and that the said cosmetics deal with Revlon was signed to someone else. Source listed below:
- The show 'A Shot At Love With Tila Tequila' was advertised as a platform for a group of men and women to compete for a legitimate monogamous relationship with the internet celebrity commonly known as Tila Tequila who was portrayed as "looking for love". However, there has been speculation that Tila Tequila already had a boyfriend and was participating in the show as a ploy to further her singing career. Bobby Banhart, the winner of the first season, publicly stated that the show was fake, posting on his MySpace blog: "well everyone wants to know so here it is she never called me after the last show and no one would give me her number so pretty much I feel like and a**...". Following the show Tila Tequila released a CD entitled 'Sex', featuring popular singles 'I love U' and 'Paralyze', as well as a self help book entitled "Hooking Up with Tila Tequila: A Guide to Love, Fame, Happiness, Success, and Being the Life of the Party". She has been criticized since, accused of deliberately falsely staging dating shows for the sole purpose of furthering her career. Sources are listed below:
While I concede there are certainly examples of reality TV show success stories, it seems to me that these shows are clearly not set up for the purpose of being, as you said, "a platform for those who have been slogging for a career". These shows humiliating, cheap entertainment, and are set up for purposes primarily other than for the benefit of the contestants and are therefore both not good forms of entertainment, but also unrealistic avenues for realistic and successful careers.
aarshiata forfeited this round.
aarshiata forfeited this round.
I believe, given the circumstances, I have to win by default on conduct, convincing arguments and sources unfortunately. I want to suggest that I should also win on spelling and grammar given by the mere fact alone that I consistently capitalized the names of shows and that I didn't end any posts mid-sentence. Agreeing before/after the debate I leave completely to voter discretion.
To my opponent: If you wish to restart the debate at a later point when you've got more free time to participate properly I'd be more than willing :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by silntwaves 7 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.