"reality" tv vs. quality programming

ok, so i don't have time to write in my blog today but i felt compelled to do so. and i don't think it will take long.



last night i finished watching "wonderfalls", another short-lived FOX project. i doubt if many of you (um, is anyone even reading this?) have seen it unless you have specifically sought it out. apparently it only aired 4 times, 3 times on friday night (the worst night for watching tv) and the last time on thursday (the most competitive). it never had a chance. it was like omar epps' underdog character in the boxing movie "against the ropes" (2004) with no obnoxiously-accented meg ryan to pump it up so it could come back and claim the middleweight boxing championship (sorry, it came on last week).



it makes me so sad. i watch these television programs like wonderfalls and arrested development and i think "there are some talented people out there-producers, writers, actors, etc.-surely there's something decent on television. i mean, if they cancelled this the ones still on must be awesome." and yet, it seems there is never anything good on. i mean, people like the office, and i'm glad that's on but the only reason it was given a chance is because of the success of the British one.



bielby and bielby (2003) argue that network programmers use several strategies to minimize risk in their organizational environment. (is that jargon? i can't tell anymore.) specifically, tv is a dangerous place to be for organizations; they have to put out all these shows but they have no idea which will work better, which will make them money, etc. so they rely on several strategies. one of these is the use of familiar and popular actors, writers, producers, and genres. this would explain why we have BS show after BS show premised on the idea of a dopey obnoxious working class guy in the northeast married to a skinny, backtalking, smart and sarcastic cutie-pie little wife (please don't make me list examples). now, i would say maybe all these shows are a imitation/bastardization of roseanne, which i think was pretty good (of course, i was in elementary and middle school when i watched it). the others are pale, stupid imitations that should never have been made. sorry, i feel strongly about this.

so the thing that concerns me is that not only do we have all the kings of queens, but we also have all the insipid nauseating reality tv shows. one of my former roommates knew this guy who made a living off coming up with lame reality tv show ideas, making pilots, and selling them to network programmers. i was floored. seriously? he can't be the mastermind behind this whole fad, there must be tons of them! i mean, i love top chef as much as the next person. okokok i love top chef more than anyone i know, but come on! how many times do people really want to watch survivor? (survivor is actually quite interesting, since it seems to have inspired a popular television drama, lost). how many times do people want to watch the bachelor and all of its progeny?



for network programmers, though, why should they invest all the time and money into making quality tv shows that may or may not succeed, when they can invest very little time and very little money in a show that seems likely to succeed (reality tv)? (bielby and bielby also found that these strategies didn't guarantee success, so they're not even effective anyway...)

i am afraid, you see, that we are stuck in a (useless) downward spiral of bad tv: with sitcoms that all look the same and sound the same, and dramas that all look the same (how many law and orders do we need? i personally think we would be fine with just vincent d'onofrio's). there are a few exceptions, but the trend really does frustrate me.

what's worse, instead of coming up with new interesting ideas when ratings slump, the shows seem to include more sex, more skin, more trash, more violence, more drugs, more incest, more rape, more bad language etc. i'm not saying i think censorship should be the answer. but how about programming that attracts people coz it's good? rather that coz it's nasty or taboo? are people that stupid and trashy? or is it that we have no more options? do people actually like the show yes, dear?



the reason this came up was because after finishing wonderfalls last night and mourning the fact that it is dead forever despite being brilliant, i opened up daily variety today and apparently FOX is offering us a new reality program. please, permit me to quote:



Fox has pacted with the producers of "Joe Millionaire" and "Temptation Island" for a reality skein that might best be described as "Desperate Housewives: The Revenge."

Lensing has just begun on the 11-episode skein, whose working title is "When Women Rule The World."...

Fox reality guru Mike Darnell [Faust], who's overseeing the project for the net, said the premise behind the show is simple: "You take 12 attractive women who feel like it's still a man's world and who think they've hit a glasss ceiling, and you give them their own society to run. Then you take 12 macho, chauvenistic guys who also think men rule the world and see how they survive in a world where they're literally manservants....They'll have to obey every command from the women."

i. have. no. words.