Reality TV: the genre that many love to hate and yet also a format that some just cannot quite look away from. The inherent appeal seems very perplexing as most examples showcased often have some deeply problematic elements, ranging from low production value or questionable ethics, these elements never seem to lessen the desire to ‘check’ how things play out on a real ( or at least, perceived as real) environment . So how should one approach these kinds of production styles that often defy basic logic by showcasing such problematic (and often bad) decisions, over long extended view periods? Today we explore exactly why some tv shows operate beyond normal critical analysis or simply 'good taste' when dealing with reality formats.
The Allure of the Absurd: Defining "Trash" Reality TV
The main key that most successful ‘trash TV’ shows display is by openly presenting its core values. "Floribama Shore," for instance does not hold back in showing some problematic behavior (which are then openly criticized by people who may not actually watch those series on repeat) with its cast showcasing that no personal growth is expected or needed. "90 Day Fiancé” throws together highly unlikely couple pairings with very limited chances of success while showcasing many difficult cultural, moral as well as personal viewpoints openly for everyone to witness, with "Love is Blind,” putting romance over all and creating that same intense drama but without adding in ( on its core format) the need for any ‘long running relationships’. All core design values tend to be ‘in your face’ and very obvious, with characters that almost instantly get portrayed within specific roles for people to relate but not necessarily idealize or emulate. All three productions showcase common ground: creating an easy gateway by focusing only upon initial and base-line conflicts.
Also shows like "The Simple Life," manage to turn wealthy socialites as ‘fish out of water’ in rural settings allowing casual and relaxed viewing sessions through watching the 'miserable situations' those leads often tend to find themselves into while also creating a level of social commentary where the audience sees those elements presented by design to question their own beliefs as all events unfold, its all very carefully structured from production to make even ' bad people’ ( often the leads) to be almost entirely redeemable when interacting with non privileged classes as most shows put characters under unusual parameters they had zero control over before starting; and this type of conflict often does work regardless of the format type. That same formula carries on to a different and more problematic context but often operates under those similar conditions and those include "Flavor of Love," , a show where a ‘love search’ for one particular individual devolves quickly into public displays of highly bizarre choices with all parties ( including ‘the prize’) behaving poorly and predictably at all given times, this all provides some weird kind of ‘train wreck’ effect on viewers where those very core flaws and negative attributes are precisely what make them so highly addicting and compelling.
The Train Wreck Effect: Why We Can't Look Away
The popularity that those very core aspects create do require some degree of deeper examination; some shows become successful because the mess is part of its appeal. Such as with “Vanderpump Rules” where the series creates several messy relationship cycles and conflicts all the while adding a degree of familiarity as those long running storylines often act to maintain interest instead of relying on sudden and unexpected twists because everything and everyone always revert into very core predictable traits and values or even flaws.
"Joe Millionaire," does show something very similar regarding audience anticipation; while not all similar reality production settings work with 'scandal' at their heart this core one highlights more subtle and intriguing elements; as we all know from day one that something’s wrong or its 'not as advertised' but still there’s also a sense of a ‘human need’ in each story: watching how easily individuals fall for obvious traps whilst showcasing that most characters aren't any wiser or too emotionally clever compared to real world viewers at home. “Love After Lockup,” simply adds more emphasis for this as we constantly keep track on clearly dysfunctional and unstable unions ( almost always knowing from start how all this will all end up and how all ‘love’ here has incredibly high limitations that might as well serve as markers instead of an organic progression). And also finally with "Too Hot to Handle," all viewers (as with past series) do understand from the core structure: the most simple premise of ‘abstaining from intimacy’ should make all relationship arcs nearly impossible to work over the course of a long duration for those character roles; which of course often happens by design. With every show all viewers understand most events tend to occur in completely predictable parameters with those limited choices setting those formats into motion rather than any 'creative or surprising writing value'; but all of them have common appeal and by that logic we ask if those might carry a pattern?
The Cultural Mirror: Reality TV and its Reflective Properties
While those reality TV programs could easily be seen as the lowest common denominator of the current television market, all such series tend to focus ( whether directly or by accidental design) towards common or very core ‘ human values’. Series such as "Jersey Shore" (where it isn't simply some low brow 'trashy values' at heart ) creates archetypical character groupings that all represent social interaction with recognizable conflicts among people struggling with identity within limited external options and personal self improvement methods that simply dont align or help create growth; This particular production does highlight how external surroundings often limit an individual regardless of good intentions by clearly making those internal characters always clash from what the environment might expect as standard 'good value'; they often behave in ways that seem illogical for outside views while working very logically for what they are accustomed from those settings, creating many moments for conflict within a shared and confined space ( an important recurring motif for many other reality tv shows in those shared areas such as ranches, villas or mansions and etc)
Even when programs seem designed to explore low points with highly dysfunctional formats most viewers will not feel distant as all are created to reflect very base human feelings. While "Born in the Wild," shows how flawed individuals tend to rely solely on non verifiable ( even unproven) methods even when faced with death by using a “back to the roots mentality” as a means of rejecting progress, which also makes one reconsider what’s most important when following a specific direction in life , while also the now sadly retired show format for “Cheaters,” openly creates those ethical discussions on trust issues often by using highly questionable ( and arguably low value) methods; those aspects always provide interesting discussion as it taps into fears or basic emotional undercurrents by showing common experiences in the most unflattering light or in the most extreme versions to trigger more audience engagement due to direct connections with viewer emotional cores . So despite seemingly ' mindless entertainment’ reality tv is always directly and subtly also commenting on social constructs at every episode and cycle.
Conclusion: Why We Watch and What it All Really Means
What can be derived from those ‘trash tv’ series isn't about the programs being good, their appeal lies, in many cases over them showcasing very bad and wrong decisions ( while also in other rare cases showing how difficult 'making right’ can truly be with programs often showcasing those same difficult ethical choices but from vastly differing viewpoints depending on the structure). However this ‘wrong’ usually leads into deeper underlying themes related to power structure, lack of agency as well as responsibility but all of those qualities do come forward within recognizable human settings and values making those stories much more relatable. Also the need for belonging despite obvious flaws or the quest for love often (with more failure than successes in those type of formatted series as most ‘winners’ seem only ‘more chaotic’ rather than truly functional individuals and characters) adds to their long lasting appeal, even if you can also see how limited their chances truly are. It becomes more than simply passive entertainment by making people re-examine and also challenge their pre existing ideas about specific and shared collective ideologies.
Therefore the best reality shows, often described as ‘trashy’ aren't those who simply use shock value (although most also are prone to showing very poor taste or morally bad choices) what seems more obvious, in retrospect is their ability to show that we have deep commonality to those on the screens and the series, that human emotions often work through very specific well established cycles despite very different settings or production styles: that people might be fundamentally different but often operate over extremely similar codes of behaviour and value, and their consistent choices which all lead onto their ‘personal narrative fate’; all those aspects, in a strange, and often accidental, design have led most popular and long running reality based shows into modern media success because ultimately most do understand that what it might display could just as easily be a mirror to their own life in different shades or perspectives and those small hidden elements of truthfulness add to a viewing format that isn't exactly going to end any time soon.