reality tv shows should be banned essay

Pros and cons of reality TV shows

The First Post guide to the issue of the day

• Newsletter sign up Newsletter

ARGUMENTS FOR:

• We live in an age of mass culture. More people read tabloids than the broadsheets, and reality TV is a fair reflection of this.
• Elitism is out of date. People are no longer willing to accept only what broadcasters think is good for them. There is nothing wrong in giving people what they want.
• It is intrinsically fascinating to see how people speak and behave in unusual situations. This is why many intelligent people find themselves gripped by Big Brother and other reality shows. They teach us something about human nature and so broaden our experience.
• If we believe in freedom and free speech, then we have to accept reality TV as an expression of popular and democratic taste. Nobody is compelled to appear in reality TV programmes, or indeed to watch them.
• Reality TV is harmless fun. Only pompous people and snobs condemn it.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST:

• Reality TV is vulgar and shoddy. By creating pseudo-celebrities it contributes to the debasement of popular taste.
• It is often cruel, exposing the participants to gross humiliation for our amusement. This makes it the modern equivalent of going to laugh at the lunatics in Bedlam. The present row over racism on Big Brother shows how nasty it can be.
• It exploits the vulnerable, and has been condemned by the Mental Health Foundation for doing so.
• Popularity should not be the ultimate test of what is permissible. Public executions used to be popular and still are in some countries.
• It is nonsense to say that broadcasters shouldn't set standards or be obliged to adhere to codes of behaviour. We don't for instance allow them to promote racism or sectarianism or to incite violence. Reality TV is debasing and should be strictly controlled, if not banned altogether.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox

A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com

Under the Radar About 9,000 animals have already been culled amid outbreak of 'highly contagious' PPR virus

By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published 7 August 24

Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day

By Anya Jaremko-Greenwold, The Week US Published 6 August 24

Speed Read A rocket attack at an Iraqi military base injured U.S. troops

By Peter Weber, The Week US Published 6 August 24

• Contact Future's experts
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Advertise With Us

The Week is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site . © Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036.

It’s Time to Start Taking Reality TV More Seriously

Danielle J. Lindemann ’10GSAS , a sociology professor at Lehigh University, understands reality TV better than practically anyone else. Her new book True Story: What Reality TV Says About Us takes an intellectual dive into a massively popular but maligned genre. 

Why should we take reality TV seriously?

Despite the stigma associated with lowbrow entertainment, studies reveal that more people in the US are watching reality TV than not, and nearly half of all TV series are unscripted. Media research has long shown that what we see on TV impacts our beliefs, values, and attitudes and how we move and act in the world.

I see reality TV as a kind of fun-house mirror, because it can show us ourselves in caricatured or amplified form. The genre reveals some of the worst things about society — sexism, racism, classism, materialism — and dials them up to eleven. But it also shows us the best of ourselves in its creativity. Historically, reality TV has been more diverse than other forms of media in its representation of people of color and queer people, even if those representations haven’t always been positive. Reality TV reveals how much society has evolved and, at the same time, how conservative it remains. 

You teach a course that pairs episodes of reality-TV shows with sociological readings. Which shows do you find particularly interesting?

I like RuPaul’s Drag Race , because it emphasizes how aspects of gender are performed in everyday life. A show like The Bachelor , with its fixation on marriage and rigid gender stereotypes, reveals how long-standing ideas about courtship still powerfully influence the way we think and behave. The Real Housewives franchise offers fascinating character studies and insight into group dynamics, while Keeping Up with the Kardashians explores the strength of the family unit.

What’s your take on why reality TV is so popular?  

Reality TV is voyeuristic. We like watching the “train wreck” character to remind ourselves that even if we’re messed up in our own ways, we are not the train wreck. We might feel smugly superior to the people on these shows. There is a freak-show aspect to this voyeurism too. Sometimes, it’s marginalized groups that are ridiculed, as in the case of Here Comes Honey Boo Boo , where the central family is portrayed as buffoonish and stereotypically lower-class.  

Reality TV involves real people ostensibly reacting to real-world situations, which allows us to put ourselves in the participants’ shoes and see flashes of ourselves. The genre tends to traffic in broad character archetypes — the “smart one” and the “shy one” and the “athletic one,” for example. There’s usually someone you can identify with and say “I’m a Bethenny” or “I’m a Ramona,” and so on. Reality TV is also unique in the way it encourages audience participation: we engage with the stars via social media and, with shows like The Voice or Love Island , we even vote on the outcomes. 

Binging reality TV, at least for me, can have a kind of anesthetic effect. Viewers do not need to see these shows as pure mirrors of life in order to enjoy and connect with them. We know they are constructed by producers and some scenes may be staged. Personally, I enjoy looking for “really real” moments, the smudges in the gloss — like when the Housewives haul out one another’s real-life text messages to read during reunion episodes. 

How has reality TV influenced other areas of society? 

Studies have shown various behaviors to be associated with watching reality TV; heavy viewers of the genre are more likely to drink alcohol, get fake tans, and use hot tubs on dates. While correlation does not necessarily equal causation, one well-known study established a link between viewership of 16 and Pregnant and reduced teen-pregnancy rates. 

Many people have launched successful careers after starting out in reality TV. Cardi B, for example, entered into the public view in 2015 as a cast member of Love & Hip-Hop: New York , where she was portrayed as an aspiring musician. Since then, she has pulled herself up the celebrity pipeline and become a Grammy-winning rapper. 

Some reality stars have even entered politics, the most famous being Donald Trump. Would he have been elected president if he hadn’t appeared on The Apprentice and been shown in a position of power, wearing a suit, and barking orders from behind a desk, and been depicted as always being right? We can’t know for sure, but it’s reasonable to suggest that reality TV helped pave his road to the White House. The media coverage surrounding Trump’s presidency arguably became its own reality show — in 2018, major news outlets even covered a visit to the Oval Office from Kim Kardashian. Trump is an important data point for helping us understand how reality TV both reflects and molds culture. If we learned anything from his presidency, it’s this: one thing that’s “really real” about unscripted programming is its impact.   

More From Books

8 Books that Will Transport You to Another Time and Place

These works of historical fiction provide fascinating windows into life long ago, with plenty of wisdom for our current age

6 New Books to Add to Your Summer Reading List

All by Columbia alumni authors

Review: Long Island

By Colm Tóibín

Stay Connected.

Sign up for our newsletter.

General Data Protection Regulation

Columbia University Privacy Notice

Reality Television Has Negative Effects on Society

Is Reality Television rubbish? Does it have a negative effect on society? Should it be banned?

All the Yes points:

Reality shows are bad, lazy television. they mostly show ordinary people with no special talents do…, reality tv is dishonest – it pretends to show “reality” but it actually distorts the truth to suit t…, reality shows send a bad message and help to create a cult of instant celebrity. these programmes s…, reality shows are corrupting as they rely on humiliation and conflict to create excitement. the pro…, reality shows are driving out other sorts of programmes, so that often there is nothing else to watc…, reality tv is actually getting worse as the audience becomes more and more used to the genre. in a …, all the no points:, yes because….

Reality shows are bad, lazy television. They mostly show ordinary people with no special talents doing very little. If they have to sing or dance, then they do it badly – which doesn’t make for good entertainment. TV bosses like them because they are cheap compared to putting out shows with proper scripts, actors, musicians, etc. Even if they are popular, that doesn’t make them good programmes. It just means that some people have no taste and will watch any old rubbish. Broadcasters should be aiming at excellence, giving their viewers quality programmes which expand their cultural horizons.

No because…

Reality television programmes are very popular with audiences of all ages and types. They may not be high culture but most people do not want that from television. Most viewers want to be entertained and to escape for a while from the worries and boredom of their everyday life. There is no harm in giving the people what they want – that is what the free market is all about. Reality shows are also popular because they exploit new technology so that millions of people can participate in the programme – typically by voting.

Reality TV is dishonest – it pretends to show “reality” but it actually distorts the truth to suit the programme makers. The shows are not really “real” – they are carefully cast to get a mix of “characters” who are not at all typical. Mostly they show a bunch of young, good-looking self-publicists, who will do anything to get on TV. Usually the programme makers try to ensure excitement by picking people who are likely to clash with each other. They then place them in unnatural situations, such as the Big Brother house or the Survivor island, and give them strange challenges in order to provoke them into behaving oddly. Finally the makers film their victims for hundreds of hours from all angles, but only show the most dramatic parts. Selective editing may be used to create “storylines” and so further manipulate the truth of what happened.

Reality TV actually has a lot of value to our society. Humans are endlessly different and endlessly interesting to other humans. In these programmes we see people like us faced with unusual situations. That makes us think about what we would do in their place, and about what principles should govern human behaviour. It also shows us people who look very different from us, and helps us see that actually we have a lot in common with them.

Reality shows send a bad message and help to create a cult of instant celebrity. These programmes suggest that anyone can become famous just by getting on TV and “being themselves”, without working hard or having any particular talent. Kids who watch these shows will get the idea that they don’t need to study hard in school, or train hard for a regular job.

Reality TV provides an important social glue. Once upon a time there were only a few television channels, and everybody watched the same few programmes. The sense of a shared experience helped to bind people together, giving them common things to talk about at work and school the next day – “water cooler moments”. As the number of channels increased hugely, this sense of shared experience was lost and our sense of community went with it. Big reality TV programmes have brought that sense of shared experience back, as viewers from all social groups follow the twists and turns of each series together.

Reality shows are corrupting as they rely on humiliation and conflict to create excitement. The programmes are full of swearing, crying and argument, and often violence, drunkenness and sex. This sends a message to people that this is normal behaviour and helps to create a crude, selfish society.

Reality TV programmes are not corrupting. They do reflect our society, which isn’t always perfect, but we should face up to these issues rather than censor television in order to hide them. On the other hand, reality TV can be very educational. Programmes such as “The Apprentice” have made people think about business. Jamie Oliver has raised issues of youth unemployment and poor diet, and “Fit Club” has got people thinking about health and fitness.

Reality shows are driving out other sorts of programmes, so that often there is nothing else to watch. Reality TV is cheap and series can go on for months on end, providing hundreds of hours of viewing to fill schedules. TV bosses like this and are cutting back on comedy, music, drama and current affairs in favour of wall to wall reality rubbish. This is even worse when reality shows crowd the schedules of public service broadcasters. Stations such as the BBC in the UK, France Télévisions, or Rai in Italy have a duty to inform and educate the public. They should be made to meet that responsibility – as Rai has by saying it won’t have any more reality shows.

Television provides a wide mixture of programmes, including reality television. For those who want it, there is high quality drama such as “The Sopranos” or “Pride and Prejudice”. The BBC and other international broadcasters cover news and current affairs in great depth. Wildlife programmes bring the wonders of the natural world into our living rooms. More sports are covered in more detail than ever before. So reality shows have not ruined television as a whole. Indeed, because they make a lot of money for broadcasters to spend on other types of programmes, they are actually good for television.

Reality TV is actually getting worse as the audience becomes more and more used to the genre. In a search for ratings and media coverage, shows are becoming ever more vulgar and offensive, trying to find new ways to shock. Already some “Big Brother” programmes have shown men and women having sex on live TV. Others have involved fights and racist bullying. Do we let things continue until someone has to die on TV to boost the ratings?

Some reality programmes are bad, exploiting people in nasty ways, but many are good. This is true of all kinds of television, from soap operas, to comedy and new shows. It is wrong to label the whole genre as bad just because of a few shows.

it is rude and obnoxius

These reality TV are playing minds of not fully developed minds. You are bringing bad company of these people in your homes which you in real world wouldn’t even associate with. I know there are good people in the group as well but as an overall effect is bad for some people and they are designed to get you to fully indulge yourself in their daily routine and you waste so much time just thinking what is going on with these random people and their lives even you dont know them. People with high level of empathy and the one effected the most and their innocent minds are getting corrupt.

reality TV is trash because it encourages young people to partake in attention seeking behavior and seek validation. People traditionally frown upon these types of behavior as they are core symptoms of Narcissism and so thus encourage their fans that Validation seeking behavior is the “new norm” when it never as been to start with.

some reality shows are scripted then why are they called reality show????

Reality TV usually presents bad influences for the public. Despite the fact that some kinds of reality shows are just made to entertain the audience, now more and more shows have an inappropriate content. People on that programs show inappropriate behaviours, adult content (in any hour of the day), violence, degradation of participants and human/animal rights. Not to mention that most of them are fake. The content of each episode is prearranged, including the winners. So they are no “Reality Shows”. However a person behaves after watching a reality show is entirely up to them. Some copy the good traits and some copy the bad. Reality television is basically to provide guidance for those who watch it but now days when people are in trouble they just copy what is done in reality shows and blame them afterwards if the idea fails. Anyway it completely destroys the person’s identity and individuality. It turns them into senseless zombies.

We would love to hear what you think – please leave a comment!

after 4 years i was able to use this for a research project thanks dave

Reality TV and Real Ethics

Download Case Study PDF

← Media Ethics

Researchers

Nicholas Aufiero

Alicia Armijo

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter

CASE STUDY: Love Island and the Ethics of Relationships

Case study pdf | additional case studies.

For those who don’t tune into reality TV, a compelling new series has been attracting attention and provoking debate about the ethics of televised relationships. The hit series, Love Island , focuses on a group of attractive, young singles who are flown to an isolated villa in Mallorca to find love. In just a matter of weeks, contestants will seek a significant other among their cohort. If that wasn’t challenging enough, the contestants must compete to stay in the game. If they successfully get through the series without being dumped or voted off, contestants are scrutinized by the audience who votes for their favorite couple at the end of the show (Martin, 2019). Some might find this show to be a recipe for disaster while others might find this to be nothing but a net gain for everyone involved—for both contestants and for viewers.

Many would argue that this show is ripe with demonstrable benefits for those who are daring enough to compete. Who wouldn’t enjoy a free holiday at a booze-filled villa in the Mediterranean surrounded by beautiful singles? It is basically a month-long slumber party for adults with a chance to win a £50,000 prize. More than that, many contestants reap the long-term benefits of massive social media followings that allow them to make a living off of sponsoring brands. As noted writer Jenny Éclair of The Independent affirms, “This could potentially be your magic golden Willy Wonka ticket to Lamborghini land” (Eclair, 2019). Without question, being a  Love Island  contestant is a sure-fire way to get your day in the spotlight and benefit financially to boot.

Fans of the hit series also contend that  Love Island  invites open discussion about what it means to be in a healthy relationship. As audiences get to know the contestants, they can begin to relate to them and see commonalities in their relationships. By watching the dramas on the show, audiences can self-reflect and explore questions about relationships that may not have occurred to them outside this medium. In fact, in a recent blog post, famed actress Lena Dunham shared her experience of indulging in the show. In doing so, she explored important questions about the complexities of romantic relationships. Like many of the contestants on the show, she found herself asking, “Can you love again after the hurt? What does partnership mean? And what does it mean to know someone if you don’t know yourself?” (Dunham, 2019). Raising such questions are valuable for coming to a better understanding of ourselves in our relationships.

Importantly, this show is an effective way to promote a national dialogue about relationships.  RAZZ Magazine writer, Charlotte Foster, explains that viewers can “point at the screen while saying ‘they should not treat another human being like this’” when they see psychological abuse” (RAZZ, 2018). By recognizing abuse, we’re in a better position to address it where it exists off-screen. Just as Lena Dunham was able to see the shortcomings of her relationships portrayed in the show, so too will millions of other  Love Island  viewers.

Even so, many would argue that  Love Island  may not be the most legitimate foundation for cultivating real-life healthy relationships. The show presents unhealthy examples of relationships and so cannot inform audiences about what is necessary to develop healthy ones. Since most viewers live such radically different lives from participants on the show, it is unlikely that they could come away from watching it with applicable lessons for their lives. As a case in point, the contestants are all incredibly fit, tan, and beautiful socialites in their twenties. The relationships that are represented are heteronormative and masculine-centric ones. Moreover, as Luanna de Abreu Coelho from RAZZ Magazine points out, “contestants are chosen and rejected by other islanders based almost entirely on appearance” ( RAZZ , 2018). Of course, healthy relationships are not primarily motivated by physical attraction.

Another reason that many have found this show problematic is due to its unhealthy effects on the show’s contestants. The show achieves its supreme drama by effectively cutting them off from the outside world. The extreme isolation and the competitive nature of that social dynamic creates a unique and unnatural social environment. The show’s provocation of contestants under the watchful eye of cameras has recently led to serious public concerns about the contestants’ mental health. Following the suicides of two ex-contestants of  Love Island , the English Parliament began an inquiry into the “production companies’ duty of care to participants, [asking] whether enough support is offered both during and after filming, and whether there is a need for further regulatory oversight in this area” (“Committee Announces,” 2019). After finishing their two-month stint in Mallorca,  Love Island  contestants come back to the real world as celebrities. However, that celebrity status quickly fades when the next stirring season of  Love Island  comes out. Contestants go from relative obscurity to fame and back again within a year. This instability would certainly be taxing on anyone’s mental health.

Love Island  has captured the attention of millions of viewers in recent years. The show could spark much-needed discussion about relationships. At the same time, it is questionable whether this or any reality TV show can serve as a pedagogical tool for guiding viewers to cultivate healthy relationships.

Discussion Questions:

• Are creators of reality TV shows morally responsible for the psychological effects on their on-screen participants? Why or why not?
• What are the ethical problems with reality TV? What values are in conflict in this case study?
• Do the possible benefits of sparking a conversation about healthy relationships outweigh its possible harms for contestants? Explain your reasoning.
• What principles would you suggest to someone who wanted to make an ethical reality TV series about relationships?

  Further Information:

“Bafta TV Awards: Britain’s Got Talent,  Love Island  and Blue Planet II win.”  BBC News , May 2018, Available at:  https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-44102374

“Committee Announces Inquiry into Reality TV.”  UK Parliament Website , May 2019, Available at:  www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/digital-culture-media-and-sport-committee/news/reality-tv-inquiry-launch-17-19/

Dunham, Lena, “Lena Dunham on  Love Island : ‘I’m Asking the Same Question They Do – Can You Love after Hurt?’”  The Guardian , July 2019, Available at:  www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/jul/27/lena-dunham-love-island-can-you-love-after-hurt

Forrester, Charlotte, and Coelho, Luanna de Abreu. “It’s Debatable: The Ethics of  Love Island .”  RAZZ , July 2018, Available at:  https://razzmag.com/2018/07/11/its-debatable-the-ethics-of-love-island/

Eclair, Jenny. “If You’re Thinking of Applying for  Love Island , the Reality TV Suicide Rate Should Make You Think Again.”  Independent , March 2019, Available at:  https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/love-island-mike-thalassitis-sophie-gradon-suicide-reality-tv-a8838491.html

Martin, Laura. “When Is the  Love Island  2019 Final Tonight? Start Time, How Long the Final Episode Is and Prize Money Explained.”  INEWS , July 2019, Available at:  https://inews.co.uk/culture/television/love-island-2019-final-prize-when-date-how-many-episodes-634661

Nicholas Aufiero & Alicia Armijo The UT Ethics Project/Media Ethics Initiative Center for Media Engagement University of Texas at Austin December 5, 2019

Cases produced by the Media Ethics Initiative remain the intellectual property of the Media Ethics Initiative and the Center for Media Engagement. They can be used in unmodified PDF form without permission for classroom or educational uses. Please email us and let us know if you found them useful! For use in publications such as textbooks, readers, and other works, please contact the Media Ethics Initiative.

It’s Time To Rethink The Ethics Of Reality TV

Urmi Pandit

Channel 4’s documentary Jeremy Kyle Show: Death on Daytime analysed the consequences of one of the UK’s most popular reality TV shows – most recently, the suicide of Steve Dymond in May 2019. When a guest takes their life just a week after filming, for a show that repeatedly faced criticism over its unethical nature, we should be urged to investigate the roots of the issue, as clearly changes need to be made. There has long been controversy surrounding famous reality TV shows. Urmi Pandit explores the morality behind some of the most notorious ones.

Afrer running for 17 seasons, The Jeremy Kyle Show was finally cancelled in 2019. Some argued at the time that this was long overdue, as the show had been considered by many as an exploitation of the vulnerable people who appeared on it, dramatising their problems. The whole premise of the show certainly appears flawed if we compare its advertisement as a tabloid show to help resolve personal issues to its reality; YouTube is full of clips of Kyle instead shouting at, insulting and laughing in the faces of his guests in front of a heckling studio audience.

Reality TV shows seem to purposefully manipulate their participants’ behaviour, provoking them to react in a way that would ensure good ratings

A judge once described Jeremy Kyle’s show as “human bear-baiting” . In the same way, many reality TV shows seem to purposefully manipulate their participants’ behaviour, provoking them to react in a way that would ensure good ratings. The questionable ethics of this is clear, leading us to ask why production teams feel they need to twist or exaggerate the truth to make a show ‘better’. As well as the effect on the victims themselves, surely this encourages falsity and could cause audiences to become misinformed, if they take everything they see on TV at face value?

Perhaps the key issue here is that reality TV shows are too focused on their viewers’ entertainment to remain ethical. Essentially, would they be as popular if it weren’t for the fights, drama and comedy that people supposedly want to see? You might instinctively think “no”, with which the writers and producers clearly seem to agree, but this then means we have to question what this says about modern audiences and whether that is a valid reason not to demand change. 

These people are set up to be laughed at

I remember watching The X Factor as a child and being confused as to why certain contestants, like Wagner in 2010, were allowed to progress so far into the competition despite an absence of significant singing ability (isn’t that the whole point?). I also have some shocking memories of the judges’ cruel comments, for example when the notoriously rude Simon Cowell compared a three-person girl group to “before, during and after Weight Watchers”. It’s clearer to me now that things like this are intentional, as well as highly unethical, since these people are set up to be laughed at.

Think of the way that whenever we see physical fights on reality TV shows, it means that the camera crew probably instigated them. Even if they didn’t, it is clear that they still stood by and just filmed them instead of intervening or helping those involved. A clip with 351,556 views from an episode of Real Housewives of Potomac  shows contestants Monique and Candiace being recorded as their heated disagreement leads to a physical altercation. Again, we must question what this shows the general public about appropriate behaviour and dealing with conflict – should TV production companies hold more accountability for the conduct that they promote?

Receiving a wave of hate over social media has become normalised for those who appear on the UK’s biggest reality TV shows; anything they say and do, if not just their appearance, is scrutinised by strangers online. The severity of this has led to the tragic suicides of several people associated with Love Island in particular. Presenter Caroline Flack’s death in 2020 instigated a debate about social media abuse due to the impact  that online hate had on her mental health.  

When multiple suicides have been linked to various shows, the serious problem of how reality programmes open their participants up to this level of hate is certainly exposed

Her suicide followed that of the show’s Mike Thalassitis a year prior, whose death also highlighted criticism over the lack of care from the producers over their contestants, especially those who are struggling with other things affecting their mental health. It is debated whether the fault here lies with reality TV or with social media itself and its use. However, when multiple suicides have been linked to various shows, the serious problem of how reality programmes open their participants up to this level of hate is certainly exposed.

It is also vital to explore the harmful ideas and stereotypes perpetuated by reality TV shows themselves. Naked Attraction for example is a light-hearted watch, yet dangerous at its core. As a dating show where a person chooses their match from six nude contestants with their faces hidden until the end, the basic idea is that they get to pick particular attributes that fit their preferences. It could be argued that the show promotes body positivity and confidence in that it usually includes people of different races, heights and weights – viewers at home can be encouraged that their body is normal, and attractive.

It’s hard to ignore, however, how the premise is rooted in the flawed concept of deciding someone’s desirability based purely on their body rather than their personality. This means that despite a range of diversity in the choices, the contestant is still completely free to pick their exact body type, while others are abruptly and rudely eliminated, and their bodies are openly commented on as they walk away. In one particular episode, I remember an older man who obviously preferred younger, more petite girls with minimal body hair, and it really didn’t sit right with me.

Many problematic racial stereotypes like the ‘sassy black woman’ are also repeatedly circulated in reality TV. These, along with negative classist stereotypes used to demonise the working class, prevalent in The Jeremy Kyle Show , exacerbate the unethical nature of these programmes.

When vulnerable people are placed in the public eye, it causes a natural violation of their privacy. Pageant shows like Toddlers and Tiaras have also come under fire for pitting impressionable young girls against each other under a spotlight, encouraging a superficial emphasis on appearance. The audience watches to judge, pick favourites and comment negatively on the contestants they don’t like, disregarding the fact that above all, they are just children.

If we continue to enjoy the drama and humiliation involved, we become complicit

So, ultimately, is it time to rethink these shows? 

Evidently, there are fundamental issues with the production of reality TV shows; we have to consider that it probably can’t be ethical ‘entertainment’ if this is gained at someone else’s expense. As viewers, I think we share responsibility for how we feed into this culture, since if we continue to enjoy the drama and humiliation involved, we become complicit; ultimately these shows only continue due to consistent views.

It is time for these programmes to be more closely regulated and monitored

Though the popularity of certain shows cannot be denied, it is time for these programmes to be more closely regulated and monitored during production, to instead promote more empathy and support for the contestants involved. In the end, there’s nothing wrong with healthy competition, but it should be agreed that changes need to be made to the lack of morality within reality TV. 

Featured image courtesy of Nicolas J Leclercq  via  Unsplash . Image license found  here . No changes were made to this image.

For more content including uni news, reviews, entertainment, lifestyle, features and so much more, follow us on  Twitter  and  Instagram , and like our  Facebook  page for more articles and information on how to get involved.

If you just can’t get enough of Features, like our Facebook as a  reader  or a  contributor  and follow us on  Instagram .

Interview: Ask Elliot On Their New EP ‘Way Too Cool For Me’ And The Liverpool Music Scene

“hamlet on steroids” – film review: the northman, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Student Housing: Is it ever too early to sign a contract?

Third Parties – is it worth voting for them?

IndieSoc – Society Spotlight

How Fast Can You Say FYP?

University of Sussex Students' Newspaper

Should some reality TV shows be banned?

By Rebecca Spencer

The Big Debate is a regular Badger feature which brings the spirit of competitive debating to the printed page. Two writers tackle a contentious topic, representing polarised views. They might not agree with what they write – on this page, they represent a viewpoint, not an individual. This week, they discuss whether some reality TV shows should be banned.

Katie Drake

There are some reality TV shows that should definitely be banned if the ethical considerations at hand are not taken more seriously, as they have such detrimental effects on the people taking part. As a Psychology student myself, ethical concerns are something I have studied and have had to abide by.

Informed consent is something required for any study. Generally, in recent programmes such as ‘Love Island’ and ‘I’m A Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here!’ this is followed; which may lead some to believe that the shows are ethical. However, when we consider the protection from harm participants are entitled to, the ethics of these shows become questionable. Sophie Gradon , Micheal Thalassitis and 38 other deaths linked to reality show stress are prime examples of the lack of protection from ‘consequences’ of participating in reality TV.

We can see this from active twitter and Facebook conversations that go on whilst the show is airing. Contestants often receive unrelenting abuse; this year, as well as others, has seen participants abused for their appearance.

Yewande, who participated in Love Island received comments that she was ‘too skinny’ and ‘too dark’. Whilst everybody is aware that the contestants each consent to participation, the question remains as to whether they are actually prepared to deal with   or informed of the public scrutiny they subsequently receive. Contestants have not been adequately protected from harm.

The problematics of ‘protection from harm’ also applies to both humans and animals on ‘I’m A Celeb’. Dead animals are frequently used in eating trials and live animals are used in other trials.   After watching this, many animal rights activists complained, as the trials cause unnecessary harm and distress to the animals.

The ‘Wild Welfare’ project was particularly involved in this debate, as they claimed that the producers were ‘failing to give proper consideration to animal welfare’.   Animal welfare has improved in this year’s show and contestants are no longer required to eat live animals. Whilst this proves that the show is open to improvement, it potentially represents a wider problem in the media industry of animal cruelty for entertainment purposes.

However, I wouldn’t argue that all reality shows should be banned altogether. Partly, this is because there is such a huge range. Given this, it might be dangerous to categorise all reality shows as unethical. But some reality shows do have ethical issues and should be improved or banned.

I would also like to raise the issue of contestants being treated as commodities, as they compete to win money. For example, ‘Love Island’ contestants have the chance to win £25k.

Effectively, producers are treating their contestants like objects of profit – not people. In my opinion, this drives the attention away from wellbeing and towards potential profit. Do they even care about the participant’s mental health or is it all about the money? Whilst intentions might not be totally callous, it does put profit above welfare.

Whilst contestants are paid to take part, they often have little control over how the show portrays them. Both ‘Love Island’ and ‘I’m A Celeb’ condense 24 hours of footage into an hour-long episode each day where individuals can often be misrepresented. Ultimately, producers have a disproportionate amount of control and power over how they represent each participant to the public.

Jonny Michell, a contestant on ‘Love Island’ in 2017 claimed that contestants were pushed to behave in a certain way during recouplings, so that they would couple up with whoever the producer wanted them to.

This element of the show was particularly cruel this year as contestants had to choose who to keep and who to betray and send home. Producers orchestrate to create drama, to the emotional detriment of participants.

Producers are treating their contestants like objects of profit – not people

Personally, I believe these kind of reality shows should be banned but not immediately. There is no doubt that there are a multitude of ethical concerns surrounding reality TV and it is questionable whether consent ever justifies their existence.

Yes, contestants are being paid but they are not necessarily emotionally prepared to cope with the consequences or supported through this journey, I mean, can anyone ever be? Many shows have shown their ability to adapt and improve, which is promising, but how far can this go? Ultimately, these shows are more commonly than not, manipulative and inhumane.

Leo Cade-Smith

Shows like Love Island seem to be snowballing in popularity. The show’s 2019 season averaged 3.3 million viewers per episode, according to the Radio Times, including ‘57% of 16-34 year olds’. The show has also spawned a winter edition, with ITV executives evidently confident in a similar viewership. With an influence as wide as this, scrutiny of the show and other similar reality TV programmes is both warranted and necessary.

The suicide of ex-contestant Mike Thalassitis thrust the debate on this topic into the public eye, and the conversations that began at that time informed ITV’s subsequent decision to axe a previous flagship, The Jeremy Kyle Show. So why wasn’t Love Island scrapped? Well, a cynic would point out that viewing figures for the dating show and its spin-offs trump those of The Jeremy Kyle Show by miles. But, to judge this issue properly it would be reductive to examine only the producers’ view of this debate.

At the heart of the question of banning these programmes is personal responsibility. I am wary of making the argument that contestants ‘know what they’re getting into’, as if that makes them deserving of the tirades of abuse they receive. Indeed, the fact that these people open themselves up to abuse, does not permit or sanction that abuse.

However, it is important to recognise the reality of contestants’ ambitions in the villa. The reason contestants apply for Love Island, as with other reality TV programmes, is to make a stab at entering the personality market for the TV industry, or to raise their social media presence to an ‘influential’ level, thereby getting lucrative brand deals and sponsorships. Relationships between Love Island contestants, no matter how genuine they may be during the show, rarely last more than a few months out of the villa. The show isn’t about love for anyone: the producers want viewers, viewers want drama, and contestants want to gain public approval and even adoration. This arrangement works well for popular contestants but becomes hellish for those who get on the wrong side of the public.

The scrutiny that some characters come under is catalysed and perpetuated by the cunning editing and the snide narration of the show. Which often makes toxic personal attacks in order to engage the viewers in a wider sense of solidarity by positioning against a particular character. Ultimately though, a dating show doesn’t demand the level of hostility that love island encourages. This ‘drama’, often in the form of bullying, exists to feed an eager public audience.

This is where personal responsibility comes back into the picture. Each of the 3.3 million average viewers of Love Island also have a responsibility to understand the ethics of what they are watching and to stop watching if they disagree with it. Effectually impacting the profitability of the production through a drop in viewership. The realities of consumerism have created reality TV, but capitalism serves one thing: capital. If there wasn’t an audience for these shows, they wouldn’t be watched, they wouldn’t be making television producers any money, and they, therefore, wouldn’t exist.

Banning these programmes would not only push us into a debate regarding freedom of expression, but it would absolve the public of the responsibility to decide what kind of content to watch and thus condone. For better or for worse, the viewing public want these shows to continue and believe that the ethics of the show are simply not worrying enough to warrant a ban. It may be that ITV’s promises of greater psychological help for contestants have worked to allay people’s concerns. If there is going to be a real change to the way these shows operate, there must also be real change in the way we as an audience react to content like this. As it stands, the message that TV executives are receiving is a resounding thumbs-up.

A ban would not solve the problem of online hate. The vocally hateful minority view the shows’ superficial basis and banner of consumerism as an excuse for toxicity towards participants. But, banning these programmes wouldn’t change this insidious aspect of our society – one that finds a mainstream voice through the anonymity of the internet. Online hate is a wider issue that applies to pretty much all realms of the virtual world. Banning these shows won’t stop this awful new part of life, instead, we must look to change public attitudes and increase education on the horrific effects of online bullying.

So, I return to the issue of responsibility. Yes, British TV production companies are accountable for the content they create and should ensure their contestants are supported. But trusting large companies with ethical concerns has never been a very reliable tactic for ensuring change. I am not convinced that the general public wants the TV landscape to change, but even if they did, the potential for change is placed into the hands of the public by governing their viewership. I don’t see that happening any time soon.

Image credit: Dean (leu)

Related Post

Brighton’s islamophobic demonstrations: what you need to know, university of sussex students demonstrate against bangladesh crackdown, black water county: a stylish return to mainstream folk music, leave a reply cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

QUEER ACTIONISTS DISRUPT BRIGHTON PRIDE WITH BANNER READING, ” NO COPS, NO TERFS, NO LABOUR, NO PRIDE IN GENOCIDE!” 

• Join Donate
• OUR PROGRAMS
• IN THE NEWS

The Impact Of Reality TV On Our Teens: What Can Parents Do?

By Holly Peek, MD, MPH

Posted in: Hot Topics , Teenagers

Topics: Culture + Society

Research has shown  that reality TV has an impact on the values of young girls and how they view real-life situations. That being the case, it’s important to take a look at some of the standards portrayed on reality TV.

Kim Kardashian was preparing to have her baby.

Instead of making sure she had her hospital room reserved and her bags prepared, she was instead on the phone with members of her “glam squad” to make sure they would be available to ensure her hair and makeup were perfect for the day of her delivery. Her sisters chastise her vain behavior as being “typical Kim,” and it is apparent where her values lie.

Meanwhile, on another cable channel, female socialites of Beverly Hills prepare for a dinner party. Almost as soon as the women arrive in their designer clothes, the wine, catty remarks and tears begin to flow. Throughout the booze-fueled dinner, the women accuse each other of spreading rumors, and the yelling and finger-pointing ensue. A typical dinner party for the “real” housewives.

Reality television is a huge part of our television viewing culture. It may be clear to many adults that not all is “real” in the world of reality TV. However, how do children and adolescents understand the world of reality TV? What could reality TV be teaching adolescent girls, in particular, about what is valued in the real world? And, how does it affect their attitudes, beliefs, self-image and behavior?

What are some of the common themes in reality TV?

Physical Beauty And Sex Appeal

Many reality shows depict women idealizing beauty and thinness, giving the impression that a woman’s value is based on her appearance, and that popularity is derived from beauty. Competition shows such as America’s Next Top Model perpetuate this ideal, as women compete with one another to gain a lucrative modeling contract. Plastic surgery shows such as Botched , as well as the former Dr. 90210 and The Swan feature people altering their appearance and becoming more satisfied with their looks and quality of life after surgery. Many cast members of other reality shows, such as The Real Housewives franchise, are very open about their numerous plastic surgeries.

Keeping Up with the Kardashians features the life of a family that spends a great deal of time and money on appearance, with a consequent rise in fame and popularity of its girls and women.  Their Instagram pages, often followed by young fans of the show, are full of “selfies,” bikini and modeling photos. Photos that feature their “ordinary” everyday lives are highly sexualized, including the pages of the youngest teenage members of the family. This practice perpetuates the notion that “real” people gain popularity and happiness by focusing on their appearance—and to be successful, personal image, even at a very young age, should be laced with sexuality.

Materialism And Excessive Partying

Other common values perpetuated by reality TV include materialism, and an idealization of a hard-partying and “celebrity” lifestyle without regard for consequences. Both Rich Kids of Beverly Hills and Shahs of Sunset feature the lives of privileged young adults living in southern California. They take extravagant trips, wear designer clothes, spend a lot of money on alcohol-fueled parties, and are rarely seen working regular jobs. The cast of The Jersey Shore spends an entire summer binge drinking to excess, participating in risky sexual behavior, engaging in physical altercations, and even being arrested. Despite their obvious poor behavior and decision-making, their popularity continues to grow.

For anyone who has seen the 2013 movie The Bling Ring , this is an extreme example of how emulation of the celebrity and reality TV lifestyle can cause issues in teens. The movie is based on the true story of a group of teenagers in southern California who were responsible for the “Hollywood Hills robberies,” in which they robbed the homes of Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Audrina Patridge and several other celebrities. The teens idealized the party and high-fashion lifestyle that is often featured in gossip magazines and reality TV, and subsequently robbed the homes of celebrities to fuel this lifestyle. Although this is an extreme case, it does demonstrate the ability of this type of media to influence the values placed on materialism and excessive partying.

Aggression And Bullying

Reality TV typically reveals inappropriate behavior within peer groups, often promoting interpersonal drama, aggression and bullying. For example, women in The Real Housewives franchise gossip, back-stab and behave aggressively, condescending and catty toward one another. The expression of relational aggression between females seen across several reality shows gives girls the idea that gossiping is a normal part of a female relationship, that it’s in girls’ natures to be devisive and competitive with one another, and that being mean earns respect and is often necessary to get what you want.

As we try to discourage bullying, gossiping and other forms of interpersonal aggression between young girls, it’s unfortunate that reality shows often feature adults behaving in exactly this manner, all the while continuing to gain popularity in mainstream media.

Lack Of Focus On The Importance Of Intelligence And Real World Success

While reality TV seems to place emphasis on sex appeal, materialism, hard-partying and relational aggression, it does not emphasize the fact that many women on these shows are highly intelligent and successful in their real lives.

For instance, Adrienne Maloof, a former cast member on Real Housewives of Beverly Hills , is a successful entrepreneur as a co-owner of several business ventures that include Maloof Productions and the Palms Casino Resort in Las Vegas. However, it was her divorce and disputes with other female cast members that were her main focus on the show. Married to Medicine , a show featuring the lives of doctor’s wives and female physicians, focuses primarily on the conflicts among the women, not on their successful medical practices.

How To Talk With Your Children And Adolescents About Reality TV

It’s important to know how to talk to your kids about the blurred line between reality and reality TV. Since reality TV has such a strong foothold in American pop culture, it is likely not going anywhere or changing its content any time soon. However, parents can learn how to help their children critically appraise what they see in the media.

Tips for critical appraisal of the media:   

• Watch one or more reality TV shows with your teenager: First, ask what shows your teen is watching, and then determine which shows are appropriate for the age and maturity of your child. It might be that you decide that a young teen, like a 13-year-old, should not watch certain shows that a 16-year-old teen would be permitted. If you introduce “TV rules” such as these in your home, you might consider viewing the shows alone first before determining which are appropriate for your child. When watching a show with your child, feel free to make the statements or ask the questions posed in the tips below.
• Make a clear statement about the reality of reality TV shows: This is important, since kids need to know that while reality TV appears to be “reality,” it is a sensationalized reality of the television world. Nevertheless, it has an impact, and like many TV shows, can serve as a foundation for imitation. Example : “You know these shows are NOT REAL. They look like real life but are written just like other shows.”
• Find out what your child thinks is real: Start a conversation to gauge how your child views reality TV. There is no way of knowing what she thinks unless you ask. You can pose these questions about reality TV in general, or about a specific show that your child is watching. Examples : Ask her to describe what is going on in the show to get a sense for how she thinks people look and act. What is good or bad about some of the behavior you are watching together? Does she think people act in real life as they do on reality TV? If so, what has she seen among her peers or adults that resembles what she is seeing on reality TV?
• Find out if TV images affect your child’s self image and values: Reality TV and popular culture can dictate what is “cool,” and what it means to be accepted. Find out if your child is emulating values portrayed on reality TV. Examples : Does she envy the lifestyle of the charchters? Is there anything she would change about herself or wish she could do after seeing a particular show? What values are being displayed in the show? What are her values?
• Talk to your child about why she likes certain characters: It may be enlightening to find out why your child likes or dislikes certain characters. This can indicate what values your child may or may not be reflecting. Examples: What connections is she making between herself and the reality TV characters? Why does your child find certain characters appealing? Explore if that character is truly admirable, or is there something else that makes her or him seem cool. Does that character make a good role model?  Would she like to behave similarly to that character? Who does make a good role model?
• Ask your teenager about what her friends are watching: Most kids watch the same shows, as it gives them common ground for conversation. Ask about her friends’ reactions to certain shows, episodes and/or behaviors. Examples: What do her friends think is cool? Would her friends want her to act like the characters in the show? Would she want her friends to act in certain ways?
• Help your child develop critical responses to what she observes on reality TV: Talking to the television and commenting when something seems unreal or scripted can help your child develop these critical skills. Use commercial breaks to discuss these elements or pause the show when you want to take a break and talk. Examples: Ask your child, “What is going on here? What is the message in this part of the show?” If your child cannot come up with answers, you can say, “I see people being really self-centered and vain, or nasty to a friend.” Your commentary may help initiate a conversation about the content of the show at any given point.

Although the programming of reality TV can be highly entertaining, it’s important to be aware of the messages and values that these shows often portray. More importantly, it’s essential to be aware of what our children are watching so that we can teach them how to recognize and process the skewed values of television reality. This is tricky, as this programming easily deceives viewers into believing it is a true reflection of the real world.

However, by following the tips above, your child can ultimately learn not to accept what is portrayed on reality TV as the truth, but rather to think more critically about what the characters are doing, and why they are behaving in certain ways. This knowledge will give your child the tools to develop stronger values, and a more solid self-esteem that is free from the influences of reality TV.

Share on Social Media

Was this post helpful?

Holly Peek, MD, MPH

Holly Peek, MD, MPH, received her medical degree from Tulane University School of Medicine. She also received a dual Masters of Public Health degree at Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, with a concentration in global co...

To read full bio click here .

Related Posts

Reality TV: What’s Really Real?

What’s the Effect of Violent or Graphic Television?

When Idols Fail: How Do Kids Manage?

Subscribe today, your monthly dose of the latest mental health tips and advice from the expert team at the clay center..

Quick Jumps

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• Speech Writing /

Speech on Should Children’s Reality Shows Be Banned?

• Updated on  
• Dec 29, 2023

Speech on should children’s reality shows be banned: Children’s reality shows are subject to debate. The subject divides people into two opinions about whether children’s reality shows should be banned or continue. 

Those advocating for a ban on children’s reality emphasize the long-term impact on children’s mental well-being. Whereas, the opposing side can argue for the educational and skill-building benefits of children. 

To analyze the views of both sides, we should weigh the pros and cons with ethical considerations regarding nurturing talent or resilience among young participants. 

Also Read: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): How it Affects Students and Children?

5 Minutes Speech on Should Children’s Reality Shows Be Banned?

Greetings to all teachers and students gathered here. Today, I stand before you to deliver my point of view on whether children’s reality shows should be banned or not. In this speech, I have covered the possible reasons and concerns concerning both pros and cons. 

Many critics point out that reality shows adversely impact the mental and emotional well-being of children, owing to the unnecessary pressure of performing well. Also, the race among children to beat others at any cost takes away empathy from young hearts.

Another point of concern from the point of contention is the potential impact on education. Participants who participate in children’s reality shows require a significant time commitment, which potentially interferes with a child’s academic responsibilities. Compromising between pursuing talent and maintaining a healthy educational environment is important to ensure children are not compromising their long-term well-being goal for short-term fame.

In addition to concerns about the participants, the critics of children’s reality show question the impact on the viewing audience. The glorification of reality television and its emphasis on winning at all costs may instill unhealthy values in young viewers. Instead of nurturing a sense of collaboration and companionship, these shows might inadvertently promote a cutthroat mentality that goes against the principles of healthy social development. 

Some supporters argue that these reality shows positively influence children by inspiring other children to pursue their passions and big dreams. They believe that by showcasing diverse talents, these reality shows convey inclusivity and encourage viewers to embrace their individuality. Furthermore, they critically appreciate the skills of learning, practice, thinking, and communication that help the child process sensory information. And in due course, children’s television reality shows help them learn to evaluate, analyze, and understand causes and effects.

In conclusion, the debate over whether children’s reality shows should be banned is complex and complicated. While these television reality shows provide a platform for young talents and contribute to personal growth, the potential risks to children’s mental health, well-being, and educational pursuits cannot be overlooked. 

Maintaining a balance that allows for the positive aspects of implementing measures to protect children’s participation is essential. Lastly, the decision should be made to prioritise the welfare of the children and should ensure that their involvement in reality shows aligns with ethical standards and promotes their complete development. 

Also Read: IELTS Speaking Topic – Speaking Part 3: Influence of Television (Follow-up Questions)

10 Lines on Should Children’s Reality Shows Be Banned?

Let us understand the points of whether children’s reality shows should be banned or not within ten lines:

1. Children’s Reality Shows are commercial-based programs. The long-run ideas of these competitions take away precious time of the children from their childhood, which may include fun-loving activities and meeting friends. 

2. Exposure to competition at a young age may lead to increased stress and anxiety in children.

3. Reality shows may encourage unhealthy rivalries and can affect relationship behavior among children.

4. The pressure to perform best can lead to a distorted sense of self-worth in young participants. 

5. While participating in reality shows, children may prioritize fame over education, hindering their overall development. 

6. The intense scrutiny of appearance and behavior can contribute to body image issues in children. 

7. Reality shows often exploit children for entertainment, which raises ethical concerns about these shows.

8. Children, as participants in reality television, may struggle to cope with criticism, which affects their self-esteem negatively.  

9. The aim of winning the show can overshadow the importance of teamwork and the children’s cooperative behavior.

10. Banning reality television shows can protect children from long-term psychological harm.

Also Read: How to Prepare for UPSC in 6 Months?

Also Read: Parental Pressure – Care But Not Too Much!

Ans. Negative effects of children´s reality shows might include exploitation, stress, and distorted values which impact the mental health of a child.

Ans. Building confidence, teamwork, and entertainment skills are some of the advantages of reality shows that are for children. 

Ans. Children can participate in reality shows but it is required to take caution as participation might include mental health impacts. 

Ans. Children’s involvement in reality shows can cause exploitation and disrupt the normal development of their personalities. 

Ans. Reality TV can negatively impact children by influencing their behaviour, self-esteem, and values. 

Related Articles

For more information on such interesting speech topics for your school, visit our speech writing page and follow Leverage Edu .

Deepika Joshi

Deepika Joshi is an experienced content writer with educational and informative content expertise. She has hands-on experience in Education, Study Abroad and EdTech SaaS. Her strengths lie in conducting thorough research and analysis to provide accurate and up-to-date information to readers. She enjoys staying updated on new skills and knowledge, particularly in the education domain. In her free time, she loves to read articles, and blogs related to her field to expand her expertise further. In her personal life, she loves creative writing and aspires to connect with innovative people who have fresh ideas to offer.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Connect With Us

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2024

September 2024

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Have something on your mind?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

India's Biggest Virtual University Fair

Essex Direct Admission Day

Why attend .

Don't Miss Out

• Today's news
• Reviews and deals
• Climate change
• 2024 election
• Newsletters
• Fall allergies
• Health news
• Mental health
• Sexual health
• Family health
• So mini ways
• Unapologetically
• Buying guides

Entertainment

• How to Watch
• My watchlist
• Stock market
• Biden economy
• Personal finance
• Stocks: most active
• Stocks: gainers
• Stocks: losers
• Trending tickers
• World indices
• US Treasury bonds
• Top mutual funds
• Highest open interest
• Highest implied volatility
• Currency converter
• Basic materials
• Communication services
• Consumer cyclical
• Consumer defensive
• Financial services
• Industrials
• Real estate
• Mutual funds
• Credit cards
• Balance transfer cards
• Cash back cards
• Rewards cards
• Travel cards
• Online checking
• High-yield savings
• Money market
• Home equity loan
• Personal loans
• Student loans
• Options pit
• Fantasy football
• Pro Pick 'Em
• College Pick 'Em
• Fantasy baseball
• Fantasy hockey
• Fantasy basketball
• Download the app
• Daily fantasy
• Scores and schedules
• GameChannel
• World Baseball Classic
• Premier League
• CONCACAF League
• Champions League
• Motorsports
• Horse racing

New on Yahoo

• Privacy Dashboard

What Are The Legal Protections For Kids On Reality TV, Social Media

• Oops! Something went wrong. Please try again later. More content below

It’s a question that has loomed in Hollywood for nearly as long as film and television have been in existence: how to prevent child actors from being exploited?

Over the years, laws have been passed to protect children who act in TV shows, movies and commercials. Now, though, a new batch of young entertainers has emerged: the children of reality television stars and social media influencers who appear on-camera as their real-life selves.

In a recent Psychology Today essay with the headline “ The ‘Reality’ of Kids on Television ,” sociologist and author Hilary Levey Friedman argued there should be laws in place to protect the children who appear on reality TV and social media.

In her piece, Friedman, who teaches at Brown University, noted that child actors in California are protected in part by the Coogan Law (so named for the early child actor Jackie Coogan), which was passed in California in 1939.

The Coogan Law came as a result of a lawsuit filed by the former child actor against his mother and his stepfather in 1938, according to Screen Actors Guild — American Federation of Television and Radio Artists . Upon turning 21, the child actor (who starred alongside Charlie Chaplin in the 1921 silent comedy “The Kid”) learned that his parents had squandered his childhood earnings.

Following decades of lobbying and adjustments, today’s Coogan Act requires contracts for child actors and performers to set aside part of their income to be put in a trust fund or account that can only be accessed once they’ve reached the age of 18.

Similar laws eventually were passed to protect child actors in other states, including New York, Illinois, Louisiana and New Mexico. After the performances of Jon and Kate Gosselin’s eight children became an issue in the reality show “Jon & Kate Plus 8,” the state of Pennsylvania passed a law that provided some protections for child reality stars .

Nevertheless, in most parts of the country, children “performing” on reality shows and on social media — including in ads that appear in their parents’ sponsored posts — remains a nebulous area, with many kids appearing without any protections. NBC News reported that “neither the Fair Labor Standards Act, a 1938 law addressing ‘excessive child labor,’ nor California’s Coogan Act, which protects child actors, have been updated to include child influencers.” According to the U.S. Department of Labor , 17 states do not regulate child entertainment at all.

“When you consider that children who appear on reality television shows deserve at least as much protection as other child performers, it is not difficult to go even further and argue that they deserve more protection because it is their own identities and their own lives being put on public display,” Friedman writes in her essay.

Related: Their children went viral. Now they wish they could wipe them from the internet

Sally Greenberg, executive director of the National Consumers League, agrees that more protections are needed.

“Reality TV is the Wild West,” Greenberg told TODAY in a statement. “State and federal laws must be enhanced to … ensure children are not exploited and abused. Work hours must be limited to ensure the child’s educational development isn’t impaired and child participants must have a portion of family proceeds placed into a trust fund for their future needs.”

Controversies emerge over kids’ appearances

In recent years, the issue of children appearing in reality TV shows, viral videos and paid social media posts has sparked criminal investigations and spats between celebrities online.

One recent public incident involves Hudson London Anstead, the 3-year-old son of HGTV “Flip or Flop” star Christina Hall and her ex-husband and fellow television personality, Ant Anstead . Since their divorce, the two have publicly battled for custody of their young child both in court and on Instagram.

In April 2022, Anstead reportedly filed papers in court taking exception with the way Hall had featured Hudson in sponsored posts on her Instagram account. Hall responded by saying that Hudson hadn’t appeared in an ad on her account since the issue was first raised with her in April, People reported .

View this post on Instagram A post shared by ant anstead (@ant_anstead)

In a post on Oct. 3 , Hall wrote that she is so “mentally exhausted” from the situation that she decided to stop sharing Hudson on any social platform “until he is old enough to make this decision for himself.” She added that she had involved her young son in filming her reality shows so he could “participate in the fun activities/outings with our family/siblings” that happen while filming.

Friedman referenced Hudson in her Oct. 24 Psychology Today essay and argued for a modern-day “Hudson’s Law” to protect kids on reality TV and social media. This reference to Hudson in the essay prompted Hall to take to Instagram on Oct. 25 to decry the idea as “clickbait at its finest.”

“Hudson’s Law?! Really?” Hall wrote. “That is absurd. You don’t know anything about my household. Hudson is MY son. I’ve always protected him and always will.”

Hall added in her post that having her children film with her for “an hour (max) once every couple months” is “extremely different than scenarios when children are the main characters like in ... ‘ Toddlers & Tiaras .’”

TODAY reached out to Hall for further comment but her representative declined. Her ex, Anstead, sent TODAY the following statement:

“I am proud that I stood up for our son at a time in his life when he had no voice. Hudson’s childhood is simply not for sale.”

What is the impact of being a child performer?

In an interview with TODAY, Friedman explained that she put her idea of “Hudson’s Law” in quotation marks in her essay to underline that “we need something like this.”

“(Hall and Anstead’s case) is just a very high-profile case right now,” Friedman said. “It’s an interesting case legally because here’s two parents. One has consented, and one does not want to consent, to their child’s participation in reality TV or in paid ads. And so that’s an interesting legal question. How is family law going to make sense of that?”

Related: Why I put my family — and my son’s autism — on reality TV

Fran Walfish, a child, couple and family psychotherapist based in Los Angeles, told TODAY that she has worked with both child actors and child reality television personalities. She stressed that there is a need for laws that protect child reality television personalities specifically.

“I do agree that protecting identities is crucial, and it is more important than protecting a role that someone is pretending and playing for a fantasy and imaginary role,” Walfish said.

“Children developmentally are going through critical phases of psychological development and the core internal issue is developing a sense of self,” she explained. “That does not just mean self-esteem. It’s a sense of, ‘Who am I in the world? Who am I in relationship to my family and to other people?’ And it includes a value system (and) ethics.”

Friedman noted that the intersection of child labor laws and children featured in reality TV and paid social media appearances is more timely than ever.

“Lots of parents share their kids on social media ,” Friedman said. “As kids get older, they’re like, ‘I don’t want you to share that even to, you know, 30 family and friends or whatever, because that’s my life.’ So that is actually an issue ... but it’s quite different from it being tied to someone’s being compensated. ...

“That’s a form of child labor. There’s money involved in transaction, and that’s how we define work.”

Walfish’s message to parents is to think deeply about how and where they decide to spotlight their children.

“Really think twice if you’re a parent and you’ve got a child who is endowed with talent,” she advised. “Nurture it with lessons and classes, and tell your child, ‘When you’re over 18, you get to make that decision and choice’” about social media.

Related video:

This article was originally published on TODAY.com

Home — Essay Samples — Entertainment — Reality Television — Why Reality TV Shows Appeal To Viewers In America

Why Reality Tv Shows Appeal to Viewers in America

• Categories: Reality Television TV Watching TV

About this sample

Words: 2072 |

11 min read

Published: Mar 14, 2019

Words: 2072 | Pages: 5 | 11 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Entertainment Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 486 words

5 pages / 2052 words

4 pages / 2017 words

1 pages / 533 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Reality Television

Man expresses his nature by creating and recreating a firm which controls and guides his behavior in diverse ways. The organization is responsible for the satisfaction of the life of every member of the society. People [...]

As the captivating melodies of Hawaiian American Idol filled the air, Iam Tongi emerged as a shining star, captivating audiences with his mesmerizing voice, heartfelt performances, and unwavering dedication to his craft. His [...]

In the world of reality television and celebrity culture, public scrutiny often plays a significant role in shaping narratives and attributing blame. Lauren Bushnell, a prominent figure known for her participation in the reality [...]

Reality television has become a popular form of entertainment in recent years, with shows like "The Bachelor," "Survivor," and "Keeping Up with the Kardashians" capturing the attention of audiences around the world. However, as [...]

“Too stupid to Die” a new reality stunt based series is all set to premiere. Zach Holmes, the internet sensation and a hothead adventurer banned by YouTube, will feature in the show conducting bizarre pranks, hilarious tricks [...]

Television shows serve many purposes in our society. Other than serving as an entertainment source, television series have the ability to influence lifestyle habits. Although not everything that is taken from a T.V. series will [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Should children's participation in reality TV shows be banned?

• Topics >>
• MBA >>
• Latest Writing Ability Test - WAT topics for MBA preparation    -03/26/14
• « Previous
• Next »

Should children participation in reality TV shows be banned?

• RE: Should children's participation in reality TV shows be banned? -muskan kanava (04/25/16)
• thank u so much was really helpful..great ideas too
• Should children's participation in reality TV shows be banned? -Rishika Jalan (03/27/14)

Related Content

• Role of regional political parties in Indian politics
• Commercialization of Education Sector in India
• Can India become a superpower by 2030?
• Poor people are their own enemies
• Schools without a playground should be shut down
• Yoga should be made compulsory in schools
• Parents should give pocket money to their children.
• The solution to a problem is a problem itself
• Should children's participation in reality TV shows be banne...
• Essence and execution of food safety
• Voting should be made compulsory
• Should Indian democracy now pave a way to bi-party system?
• Women Empowerment - The key lies with the women
• Mankind should end war before war ends mankind
• Leaders are born, not made
• CareerRide on YOUTUBE
• CareerRide on INSTAGRAM

Related Topics

• HR - Industrial Relations - MCQs with answers
• Logical Reasoning questions for MBA, Competitive Exams
• IIFT MBA Entrance Exam
• OMAT MBA Entrance Exam
• Marketing Management - Connecting With Customers - MCQs
• IBSAT MBA Entrance Exam

Should kids’ reality shows be banned?

Conclusion :-

Want to listen to this instead?

Subscribe to our YouTube channel . We upload videos on GD topics regularly.

Related Posts

Voting rights to illiterates – illogical, ethics in politics – myth or reality, collapse of credit suisse, are corporate jobs a new form of slavery.