Comm Media

Reflections on Television and Cable

Are reality shows real?
Reality TV shows are based off of the real life of people. However, what the viewers see is not what would normally happen if the people were not being filmed for entertainment purposes. The people behind the scenes of the show most likely, in the very least, influence the characters of the reality show. The characters seem as if they were either told exactly what to do, or simply prompted to do something or to act a certain way. For example, if Tom got in a fight with Amber, but was about to forgive her, the director could convince him that he should not forgive her. Obviously some scenes are a bit more complicated than that. Even so, sometimes shows make it fairly obvious that they were at least partially scripted. Even if what was being shown was the truth, the editing could easily leave out certain parts. The editors could only show certain scenes that would make things appear one sided. Every reality show usually has a good guy, while every reality show always has a bad guy. Most people are not horrible people in reality. Everyone has both good and bad sides. Therefore, the people that viewers watch as always being nasty and making horrible decisions may only appear that way because those are the only type of scene chosen to be shown.
Reality shows are not fully script. However, I would not exactly call them real.

Have you ever liked a television show that was cancelled? Which one?
Hey, Arnold was a cartoon show that aired on old-school Nickelodeon for a couple of years. Even at the age of 17, I can honestly say that it is one of my favorite shows of all time. However, right when the orphaned Arnold found a map that could prove through an adventure that his parents were not dead but lost, the show ended. I love that show, and everyone that I spoke to that watched it loved that show as well. Though the cartoon started slow, it progressed and got better and better with every year that it aired. Even the drawings improved as technology improved throughout the years. I suppose that the show wanted to end strong; the writers and others did not want to "kill it". The people behind the scenes probably wanted to leave the show with a bang, rather than let the show overplay and grow old.

What problems do TV ratings systems hope to solve? Can you think of an alternative?
TV ratings seem to want to prevent the younger generation from being corrupt; the ratings hope to prevent a twelve year old from watching a movie with showy sex scenes, drug usage, and horribly profain language. The movie industry does not want to be responsible for teaching the upcoming generation about the vulgar things in life that they should not come in contact with for a while. However, I do not think that they are efficient. In fact, I think that they are unfair. Anyone can rent a movie from Blockbuster. They usually ID for R-rated movies. However, a PG-13 movie can easily be rented by a ten year old. PG-13 movies are rarely pushed to only viewers at least thirteen years of age. Every age seems to be watching PG-13 movies fairly easily. On the other hand, R-rated movies are a bit harder to come to watch if you are under age. Most chain theaters check for IDs. They won't even let you buy a ticket for someone else if you are not above the age of 21. Even so, there are always those theaters that let some underage people into such movies. Not to mention, the theaters that do check are sometimes a bit too strict. One time, an older woman who could not speak english was at the theater with her daughter. Her daughter was 17, but was the one speaking because she knew english. However, the cashier would not let her purchase an extra ticket for her mother, despite the fact that her obviously older-than-17 mother was present. This was because she was supposed to be at least 21 to buy a ticket for someone else. Luckily, someone else bought the ticket for her. Even so, the ratings can be a bit outrageous.
I think that ratings should exist to preview to the potential viewer what kind of content would be in the movie. However, I think that it should be the parent's decision to whether or not their child can watch it. Also, I think that 17 is a bit old to be the starting age for many movies. People as young as ten watch rated R movies with their parents. Many times, younger high schoolers want to, and are allowed to, watch rated R movies, but can not get inside. Nowadays, people know about the things in a rated-R movie a lot younger than they used to. Therefore, that rating should be altered.
The ratings should also be updated. For example, in Sixteen Candles, a woman's bare chest is shown. However, the movie is rated PG. Movies made in the present day that show nudity like that are usually rated R. Because it is an older movie, the rating is lower. I'm sure that there are many other instances as well. Therefore, the movie rating system for some movies is too primitive and should be rechecked.

posted by maggie @ 8:20 AM