Are talent shows detrimental to society?
The format is pretty much the same everywhere.
There is a stage. There is 3-4 "judges", each one with a predisposition to being nasty, nice or neutral. Then a whole array of "talented" people expose themselves to the crowd and the judges. Some are borderline handicapped mentally. Others are truly talented, whatever that means. But the cherry on the cake is that they all have a tragedy they feel compelled to share with the rest of the world. If they are not doing it for the uncle they lost in Iraq, they are usually doing it for their mum "who straggled so much to raise me the right way".
Are these shows detrimental to our society?
Yes
Side Score: 19
|
 |
No
Side Score: 15
|
|
|
|
|
I find them detrimental to society for the following reasons. Personal tragedy and family drama has become a cheap currency for fame and a further week in a competition. I feel enraged when I see people crying on television and saying "We were survivors of hurricane Katrina. It was so sad to see my best friends die and other people lose everything. I know that they want me to have this now, that's why I'm in the competition and I deserve to win". The ones that are even more offensive are the ones that somehow manage to bring soldiers of Iraq into the equation: "My cousin died fighting in Iraq. He was a hero. I am doing this for him, I deserve to win and have this for him". The selfishness is unbelievable and shocking. Also, success is no longer the product of long and laborious work and contribution. In the past, musicians had to struggle and sweat to write the first song let alone the first album. Their struggles made them gain character, which in turn, was reflected in their music. With time, their lyrics became deeper and more interesting. Gradually success would come about and people would reward them for their contributions. But with talent shows, success is at the end of 10 weeks. In order to achieve it, you simply have to perform good karaoke (and talk about your dead uncle). The other problem I have is that the contestants have become "disposable people". It's almost like it doesn't matter what happens to them after the show. Those who lose have failed to achieve their dreams and apparently that's the worst that can happen to someone. As the program narrator usually puts it: "Kelly's journey has come to an end". No one mentions the number of suicides performed by failed contestants. It's off camera so it doesn't matter. Moreover, (with shows like America's Got Talent in particular) there is something fundamentally wrong with seeing a 90 year old woman smash a brick on her 105 year old man, to the tune of Raining Men, and have this "talent" applauded or booed by a live audience. I find this detrimental because it desensitizes us. It somehow makes it OK to judge, laugh, boo, shout at, or cheer the doings of a person that has clearly flown over the cookoos nest. I would also like to find out what message these shows send to young people. I would like to know what the classmates in Shaheen Jafargholi's class think about life and success now. Do any of them value the long path of an education in science for a moderate reward? Side: yes
most of your criticism goes against the contestants. Well, the show exploits them, no doubt, but those people are still the idiots (humans) that they are, whether the show exists or not. The people who watch them and are influenced by them are just as bad. If a show really creates an impact on someone, it's their fault, not the producers. If someone commits suicide after a show, to me that's good. One less emotionally unstable faggot to worry about. and on your critique on desensitization, i think that specific situation doesn't really desensitize us. Judging people for the stupid shit they do has been around since the beginning of art (see "History of the World: Part 1"). Judgment of people (no matter what they're doing) is normal. The TV shows just make it more obvious. And I'm tired of the "think about the children" argument. Children are always going to be exposed to weird shit. It's up to parents to describe it to them. And since human beings are naturally idiots, children are always going to be fucked over. A TV show doesn't make a difference. as i said in my argument. Society is detrimental to society. Side: No
most of your criticism goes against the contestants. Well, the show exploits them, no doubt, but those people are still the idiots (humans) that they are, whether the show exists or not. First, when it comes to contestants that are of sound mind, we have every right to critisize them because they are part of the show and they choose to sell their soul for fame (by sharing their family dramas). As for the "idiots", then the show is equally detrimental for exploiting people that are incapable of judging their actions, and then selling their antics for our consumption. If someone commits suicide after a show, to me that's good. One less emotionally unstable faggot to worry about. I refuse to honor that with an answer. and on your critique on desensitization, i think that specific situation doesn't really desensitize us. Judging people for the stupid shit they do has been around since the beginning of art (see "History of the World: Part 1"). Judgment of people (no matter what they're doing) is normal. The TV shows just make it more obvious. You don't think it desensitizes us? Take a look at what used to shock us 3 years ago. Take a look at how the "talents" that are featured are getting more and more shocking and outrageous. First we laughed at people who couldn't sing. Then the show opened up to a more "diverese" range of "talents" that includes people who place a microphone up their annus and sing by controlling the pitch of their farts (this is true by the way). Why would the producers feel the need for this increase in outrageous acts, if not for the fact that we get desensitized very quickly? And I'm tired of the "think about the children" argument. Children are always going to be exposed to weird shit. It's up to parents to describe it to them. And since human beings are naturally idiots, children are always going to be fucked over. A TV show doesn't make a difference. This isn't one of those usual weird things that children are being exposed to. This is so subtle and yet so strong that it's changing the attitudes and life expectations of an entire generation. Side: yes
Well, if they featured people who were actually talented and mentally stable, then it wouldn't be. But they aren't really talent shows, they're circus freak shows which I'm morrally against. I mean, they find the craziest most unstable people possible, and feed them to the public like sacrificial lambs. I refuse to watch. Side: yes
2
points
I'm assuming you are talking about shows like: American Idol, So you think you can dance, Britain's got talent etc. The only one I have actually watched is American Idol. It's all geared towards pop. With these "judges" the producers of the show have to much control over the audiences opinion. It's just an advertising fuel to make people like pop. While entertaining at some points, it just seems dishonest and manipulative. Plus people tend to be way to closed minded when it comes to music. If you like you like it. If you don't then move onto something you do like. There is plenty to choose from. Side: yes
|
1
point
No, not at all. I find them just the opposite but I olny watch American Idol so I don't know much about the other reality shows. I did get to see the British version of Idol, "Britain Has Talent" when Susan Boyle made a smash hit on the show and when Shaheem (I've forgotten his last name) made it through to the finals but I thought they we both really talented enough to be there. American Idol takes months to complete and the competitors there seem equally as talented so I have nothing but good things to say about the show. I don't see how presenting a talent show could ever be detrimental to society. Side: No
No. Talent shows encourage people of all ages to compete against their peers and hone their natural talents. The competetiveness that each person has inside his/herself is brought out and people learn how to work hard to accomplish what they want (winning the talent show) and then once realizing how much they can accomplish when they work hard they will then use this new-found realization in day-to-day life and have much better lives because all employers want a hard working employee. Side: No
1
point
Arguments such as this one just show how elitist people can be in deciding what it means to be "cultured" or not. Popular culture, or culture of the masses, has its own inherent value because it reflects what a society at a given period in time values. Should we have elitist intellectuals sit on the side and decide what is good for all of us? These kind of thinking is backward and hinders creative progress and creativity. We do not know if 100 years from now we will be looking back at these shows with a different perspective. Personally I prefer to invest my time in other activities, such as debating online, rather than waste some time watching people showcase their talent - or lack of talent. However, I do not think that it is beneficial to society for people to put themselves on a high horse and judge popular culture, as we fall on the same trap as people in the past who could not understand other popular movements that gave birth to such wonderful things as jazz or rock and roll. Who knows what comes out of these shows, but even if nothing does, I still respect the opinion of thousands of viewers. I rather live in a world where people can be entitled to what we may think of as banalities, than in a world where taste and preferences have to be regulated. Side: No
No. Not everyone takes the path of the starving struggling musician but stay at home with their baby, or keep struggling at the "real job" to support their family or please their parent. But these people had a dream and still do have alot of talent, and some have paid alot of money to hone their "Craft". I think giving these people the outlet and chance to show their skill, not to mention their little moment of fame is a wonderful thing. Side: No
Maybe if you are pushing yourself farther than it is healthy, yes. it also depends in what you are doing for the talent show. I've heard of a girl that was 6 and dressed up as a showgirl for a talent show. that is WAY wrong. But if you are doing somthing age appropriate, and you have fun, then i don't find them bad. Side: No
I feel the talent shows now a days are more about hype,Trp's and adds than bringing the real talent into limelight. There is more of drama between the contestants, fights between judges that is highlighted again and again rather than focussing on the talent. and during the elimination round too, the host lowers the confidence of the candidates being eliminated by saying "your dreams are going to be shattered, your life is going to change forever...". this actually will have a great psychological impact on the candidate. so what if u get eliminated from a stupid talent show? that doest imply ur useless. this results in suicide attempts by the candidates.And in most of the cases public voting doesnt always pick the right person. Most of the time, voting is manipulated, candidates from good background will get their friends and parents to vote for them hundreds of times. And also people and even the judges care more abt their fashion apparel and other stuff which actually shudnt matter in a talent show Side: No
1
point
1
point
Maybe yes, but I find this shows showcasing and mirrors the real society we have today. This gives motivation to other, and some inspired from it to become aware of the environment they have. The society itself, gives life to the shows, its just we recreate our version of it so we bring awareness to others. By the way, there is this events at http://smartleesecreative.com/events/ for reliable improvisation, so maybe this one helps to in talent industry. Side: No
|
