hamr of reality tv

Good morning respected judge, my honorable opponent and members of the audience. Today, we are indeed honoured and privileged to stand before you to present our views on the motion of the house ‘’Reality Television Does More Harm Than Good.’’ First, let me introduce my team. I am Komalah Selvamuthu Raja and am the first speaker. I will define the key terms of the motion and set the boundaries for my team’s debate. My second, third and fourth speakers will strengthen our arguments by presenting various points supporting our arguments. My last speaker will summarise our team’s arguments and firmly state that reality television does no good and only causes more harm to the society. Firstly before I go on to my points , let me further elaborate on my what this motion means. By reality television we are talking about entertainment shows the make an attempt to let its audience think the show is real, regardless of how scripted that show is. Examples of reality television shows are like Dance Moms, America’s Next Top Model, Masterchef US, The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, Keeping Up With The Kardashians. A wikipedia definition of it is "Reality television is a genre of television programming that documents unscripted situations and actual occurrences, and often features a previously unknown cast. The genre often highlights personal drama and conflict to a much greater extent than other unscripted television such as documentary shows. " So now that we know what it is we are talking about, let me go on to my points.

Firstly, reality television serves a pointless function in society. What is the point of watching Kim Kardashian complain about her daily life when you can read a book, watch a documentary, or help out in the many charities out there that need volunteers. The only thing it serves for the audience is entertainment utility, but we don't want a society that focuses too much on pointless entertainment that is of no value. Going out of one's house and helping out a charity or watching a documentary also has entertainment value and also creates something of worth to society, either the extra helping hand or the additional knowledge gained. To conclude it is pointless entertainment, that does more harm by the opportunity cost lost as a result of people taking part in watching this reality television shows. Dear honourable judge, fellow debaters and members of the floor, I have presented my arguments for and against the topic. However, I would like to conclude my speech by firmly stating my stand about the motion. I believe that 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 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 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 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. 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? 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.