I don't know if lots of it is scripted, but I do know a LOT of it is edited. I am also aware that producers will tell some people going on the show to do certain things to stir up the pot and junk or whatever. The reason there's so much editing and why they pick certain people to enter the shows and why the filming goes on for nearly 24 hours/7 days a week in order to produce a 25 minute segment for the public to view for a whole week, says a LOT. 25 total minutes of 168 hours of filming turns out to be "interesting" (or just rather not boring) to watch. I'm pretty sure even MY life would be awesome if you filmed me at that rate. But also, imagine if a camera was on you for 24 hours a day... wouldn't you eventually start doing stupid shit or whatever that you know would captivate an audience because you know people are going to watch you? Ya, probably.

But it's all detremental (is this even a word?) because the negative parts of reality tv is all about being a slut, a bitch, an asshole, an idiot or ridiculously immature. And really, that last thing we need is more teenagers that are in their light years with the potential of becoming the opposite of all that, wanting to be THAT stuff. Because really, it's pretty easy to be an idiot and it takes more balls to be the opposite.

First of all, it's a big fat lie. Everything is scripted. It is edited to fit the show's agenda. Reality Television has a little to do with reality and a lot to do with "telenovela's" aka soap operas.

It's detrimental because its foundation is based upon falsities.

I wouldn't consider these shows "reality," since most of the scenes are either scripted or edited to follow a certain storyline that the producers want. The more drama, the more of an audience, the more money.

But I will say that some of those reality shows are pretty amusing.

The questions raised by today's Reality Television were first examined decades ago by Luigi Pirandello in his play "Six Characters in Search of an Author".

In that play, a fictional family of 6 characters suddenly appears (magically) in a theater during a rehearsal. Gradually they start questioning the need for actors and "make believe" when they are perfectly capable of telling their story themselves.

In other words, why write fictitious material when you can go out there and find people with real dramas, willing to talk about them publicly.

This approach has been adopted by documentary makers, reality talk shows such as Jerry Springer, and observational reality TV such as Big Brother and Survivor.

Having flicked through those shows, I am yet to be convinced that for the most part, the drama was not a creation made in the editing room...

So the reason I find it detrimental to society is because by adopting the name "Reality" it implies that the events and crazy characters we are watching are to be found in the real world and are somewhat "representative" of the what's out there. Which means that today's children are growing up with a twisted view of what is real.

its not a benefit at all, its not even really "real". sure, they put real people in real situations, except they add the cameras, and that changes everything. no one is going to act the way they do normally just haning out with friends in front of a camera.

not only that but you have to audition for it, last i checked, you dont have to audition for reality.

What a total load of CRAP. It's not really reality when you stick a camera on it. As most people know ,as soon as a camera is involved there is a total change of atmosphere, unless it is unknown, of which it is illegal.

The only descent reality shows are documentary based or teaching programs such as gardenig or cooking, or craft shows, shows showing careers. All the others are crap crap crap

.

How is "Reality Television" defined? We, as individual members of the society(Which conveniently isn't part of the television industry) may never know. These "Reality Television" could even be scripted for all we know, and i believe it is so for many of these programs tend to over-exaggerate things, and in the end, what ever "truth" that is still hidden beneath all the exaggeration becomes neglectable and are mostly discarded away as just another boring program...

I'm not trying to stereotype, oh no... for some of the "Reality programs" are actually pretty down to earth, but apparently, the phony ones just seem to out way the "real" ones.

In conclusion, i believe that Reality Television is, overall, detrimental to society

1. 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. When the British Big Brother was struggling for viewers in 2003, its producers responded by attempting to shock the audience that little bit more1. "Big Brother" programmes have also shown men and women having sex on live TV, all in a desperate grab for ratings to justify their continued existence. Others have involved fights and racist bullying. Do we let things continue until someone has to die on TV to boost the ratings?

2. Reality shows send a bad message and help to create a cult of instant celebrity. They are typically built about shameless self-promotion, based on humiliating others and harming relationships for the entertainment of each other and the viewers at home. 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. As John Humphrys points out, 'we tell kids what matters is being a celebrity and we wonder why some behave the way they do' 1 As American lawyer Lisa Bloom fears, 'addiction to celebrity culture is creating a generation of dumbed-down women.'2 Reality shows encourage such addictions and promote the generally misguided belief that they should aspire to be the reality stars they watch on their televisions.

3. Reality shows are bad, lazy and corrupting 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. They rely on humiliation and conflict to create excitement. Joe Millionaire, where a group of women competed for the affections of a construction worker who they were told was a millionaire, was simply cruel. The emotions of the contestants were considered expendable for the sake of making viewers laugh at their ignorance. Furthermore, 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. One American reality show, “Are You Hot?”, in which competitors submit to a panel of judges for ‘appearance-rating’, was blamed by eating disorder experts as encouraging the notion that ‘appearance is the most important thing’ (Becker, 2003).1 Furthermore, Paul Watson, a former reality TV show producer, believes they are ‘predictable and just creates more of the same and makes our film makers lazy’ (Jury, 2007).

4. 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. In The Bachelor, where a group of women compete for the affections of an eligible male, the ‘intimate dates’ they go on are filmed in front of any number of camera; that is not reality (Poniewozik, 2003).1 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.