Influence of Reality Shows on Indian Society

Shankar Phukan
Dept. of Mass Communication, Assam University,Assam,India

Introduction:
Mass Media is a means of communication that reaches and influence a large number of
people. The media put our environment in perspective by giving several aspects, meaning and
explanations relating to it. The media must have some pervasive influence on our thoughts,
beliefs, values, and even our behavior. Television is a popular and powerful medium that both
imitates and influences culture. For many people, television is a primary source of
information and entertainment. It is a window into a different world an opportunity to view
people, place, and things that we may not have experienced first-hand. In an increasingly
global society, television shapes societys perception of the world.
Reality shows, they say, breaks the monotony by creating interesting scripts and out-of-thebox ideas that made them stand out from the run-of-the-mill shows. Although drama lovers
are still glued to their television sets at prime time, reality shows are gaining the limelight to a
large extent. With the worldwide small screen sector coming up with new concepts for reality
shows, India too is in the race to project good and original concepts. Every day on television,
some new reality shows are being introduced, enabling the viewers to choose to choose from
a large menu of many shows. Reality television is a genre of television programming that
presents purportedly unscripted dramatic or humorous situations, documents actual events,
and usually features ordinary people instead of professional actors, sometimes in a contest or
other situation where a prize is awarded.
Media content analysis is an integral part of media studies and research that heighten media
users or citizens understanding of the society. Media programmes particularly telecast
shows, are bound to have positive or negative impact on society. Television is arguably the
most pervasive mass medium because it combines sound and pictures and no skills are
necessary the audience to watch or enjoy them. Today, reality shows with celebrities acts as a
clutter-breaking property for viewers; they provide increased visibility and a chance to reach
out to a larger TV-viewing audience. Even though the star quotient is important as it attracts
viewers instantly, reality shows keep viewers glued to TV monitor even when the presence of
stars is less relevant. Thus it is of great importance that the impact of reality shows on society
is assessed.
There are two things about reality shows that attract viewers and generate controversy: the
concept of reality or realism; and the shock effect.
The concept of reality TV draws from realism in cinema. So, its a format that presents
ordinary people in live, supposedly unscripted (though often deliberately manufactured)
situations, and monitors or judges their emotions, behaviour or talent. Such formats usually
invoke competition and provide big money as rewards.

Still, the very dissonance between the fact that these programmes are real and relevant (for
the audience) and that contestants usually compete in them for fame and moneythereby
being willing to do things they wouldnt otherwise doraises issues related to the honesty of
reality shows.
The situation is exacerbated when producers use the concept of reality to shock and awe
audiencesone way to break through the clutter.
The result says that reality shows are becoming more and more provocative and outrageous.
As eminent film-maker Mahesh Bhatt says, Today, washing ones dirty linen on prime time
is big business. We live in shameless times. People do not mind becoming guinea pigs in the
name of reality to amuse the nation and make a quick buck. And the audience gets high on its
daily dose of reality about the private lives of people like themselves.
The truth of reality programmes is they are scripted to show and say what their marketing
strategies demand. The camera angles and editing are selective that manipulate the content of
the programme defeating the meaning of reality show. Technically it is a finely edited
programme and anyone familiar with the process of video production knows how anything
can be touted as reality. The viewers have no access to the footage and ultimately viewers get
to see what the producer wants them to see. Every scene of action is imposed on the
audience. And every word uttered is carefully selected with eyes on TRPs. It is a misnomer to
call them reality shows as they are not complete live shows. In most of the reality shows the
winner is chosen by the audience. But where is the transparency? How many have cast votes
and who is monitoring them? We dont get to see the number of people who have voted for
the contestants. The reality shows are the direct promoters of mobile phone networks. The
audience could vote via SMS or telephone but the rates for these services are deliberately
kept higher than normal rates fleecing the people. The same person can send any number of
messages making a mockery of public opinion. Since the response is in millions, both the TV
channel and the mobile phone company share huge sums of earnings between them. Further,
the audience never gets to know, who has voted, which part of India has voted and what their
demographic profile is. The details of voting are never made public.
Clearly, reality television is another attempt to test all boundaries of tolerance. Without clear
guidelines and no regulation or accountability in the broadcasting sector, the tendency of
producers and broadcasters to push the envelope is obvious. Taking forward the Parliament
discussion, as suggested by eminent director Shyam Benegal, we need an independent
broadcast regulator in place at the earliest to look into these contentious issues.
Reality TV has changed the concept of TV entertainment worldwide but it has also raised
vital questions about its social relevance and tabloidization of its content. Reality TV has
created new breed of celebrities whose fame to stardom is transitory there by creating more
social and psychological problems in the already complex social system. The Reality TV has
paved way for competition basking in individualism. The participants surrender their privacy
and narrate their private life on camera to the nation breaking all the social and cultural
barriers creating social tensions in the family and social circles. Sadly these programmes are
market driven generating emotional participation of the audience and the lives of the ordinary

people become the staple media content. It can also be viewed as democratization of media
content but the market driven nature is the bottom line of Reality TV.
These reality shows are copy cats of western programmes lacking in originality and
creativity. They are seen as part of globalization of media that is trying to establish
homogenous and mono concept programmes for people of all cultures and societies. The
global franchisees of these reality shows have one common thread running globally that is to
rake in huge revenue. From a business point of view these shows are hugely successful but
from social perspective the Reality TV has created a new breed of neoliberals flaunting
individualism in a society that draws strength from unique cultural identity instead of
surveillance culture propounded by the reality programming.

History of Reality Shows:

The first Indian reality show of any kind on Indian television was Bournvita Quiz Contest
hosted by the quizzing champion Derek O Brien in 1972. It was first featured as a live show
in various cities, then went on air as a radio show. In 1992, it became the first reality show to
be featured on Zee TV and was the first Television reality show.
Then came Sansui Antakshri in 1993 which was hosted by Annu Kapoor on Zee TV. It
became the first singing reality show which ran till 2006. Zee TV later made its name to bring
about home-grown reality shows rather adapting international reality shows on Indian TV.
Sa Re Ga Ma Pa came in the year 1995 which was hosted by Sonu Nigam and in 2009
came Dance India Dance.
Sony Entertainment was another channel with the Indias first dance reality show Boogie
Woogie in 1996 which hosted by Javed Jaffrey and was introduced by Naved Jaffrey and this
became an instant hit for the channel. The boom in the Indian reality shows occurred in the
year 2000 when Kaun Banega Crorepati was aired by Star Plus and was hosted by Mr.
Amitabh Bachchan. The success of this show opened up numerous avenues for such shows
on Indian TV. Advertisers were ready to invest and also there were no dearth of participants.
Zee TV came up with Sawal Dus Crore Ka and SET India came up with Jeeto Chappad
Phaadke.
In 2004, SET India introduced another singing reality show Indian Idol which was an
adaptation to the popular international reality show American Idol. This adaptation was
further expanded when the channel again came up with a show named Bigg Boss and Fear
Factor in 2006. It turned out to be Indias most popular international adapted show after
KBC. Next breakthrough reality shows in India came up with adaptation of popular
international shows like The Voice India and So Now You Can Dance. These shows changed
the
concept
of
singing
and
dance
shows
on
Indian
Television.
List of reality shows on Indian Television:

Kaun Banega Crorepati (Star Plus)

Dance India Dance (Zee TV)

Sa Re Ga Ma Pa (Zee TV)
Indian Idol (Sony Entertainment)
Bigg Boss (Colors)
Jhalak Dikhla Jaa (Sony Entertainment)
Nach Baliye (Star Plus)
MTV Roadies (MTV)
Splitsvilla (MTV), and many more.

Literature Review:
According to Hight (2001), most assumptions about the psychology of reality television
viewership are derived from textual analyses of reality-based programs, rather than research
involving audiences. Thus, it calls for investigations of reality-based programming based on
the assumption that such programmes may implicate a network of social, economic, and
political changes in modern society and hence the study attempts to determine impact of
reality shows on the society.
According to the Nielsen (2003) ratings, shows such as Survivor, American Idol, Fear
Factors, Big Brother are attracting more than 18 million viewers per episode. A researcher at
the University of Missouri Columbia discovered these shows actually have a positive impact
on viewers.
According to Frisby C. (2003)Entertainment needs are met through reality television
because these shows allow people to make comparisons with media images comparisons
that ultimately help them feel better about themselves and their personal circumstances .
Such behaviours are easily adapted to audience specially youth, which are harmful for overall
societys progress. These traits are unhealthy and considered uncivilized in the society.
Therefore, to sum up, television helps to learn about other cultures, gives an opportunity to
spend time with family members when they watch television together. It also helps parents to
involve their children to read books on the same subjects as they discuss the television
programmes.
Reality television programmes have been around since the first broadcast of Candid
Camera in the late 1940s, although it has not been until recently years that these types of
shows have gained immense popularity. The debut of Survivor in 2000 has been credited with
the commencement of reality programming in the current television landscape (Rowen,
2000).
Most of reality television programming is geared to individuals under twenty five years of
age (Frank, 2003). Frank suggests that younger viewers are drawn to these shows because
they depict characters and situations that are relevant to their everyday lives.
Nabi et al. (2003) felt that regular viewers watched because they found it entertaining and it
entertaining and that it was enjoyable to watch anothers life as it enhanced their own

awareness about themselves. Casually viewers watched because they were bored or because
they enjoyed watching anothers life.
Nabi (2007) used multidimensional scaling to understand the subgroups of reality TV
programming. There were two dimensions along which viewers thought about reality TV,
romance and competitiveness. Dating programs were found to be a unique type of
programming that did not relate to other types. Subgroups of reality programming were found
to be fluid and difficult for viewers to separate one from another because of the overlap
among the categories. Nabi encourages reality TV researchers to focus on the qualities of the
programs and not the categories.
Kuo-Yi Wu (1990) studies the role and contribution of television in shaping of social
perception such as sex roles, crime and violence, inter-personal relationships and ageing in
Taiwan. In terms of perception of sex roles, contribution of television viewing is distinctly
contingent upon the background and other social conditions. A more liberal stance is related
to heavy viewers both Chinese or American programmes among females and those with high
parental education. They generally prefer the foreign programme to the indigenous
programmes. A consistent and significant relationship is found between weekday viewing and
a more mistrustful world view J (cited in Vijayalakshmi, 2005).
A study conducted by American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (2011) confirms
that by the time children graduate from high school they would have spent more time in front
of the television than they might have spent in a classroom. It is very unfortunate that the
modern day reality television portrays improper and inappropriate values and children absorb
it the way it is aired. Children also tend to believe that whatever they see on TV is what
actually takes place in reality. It is evident from the warning, children are advised not to
imitate the sequences of events portrayed on the shows, or the program aired is with adult
content and parental guidance is recommended (CBC Manual, 2012).
Reality television includes several subgenres, including talent competitions, dating shows,
real-life shows, and makeover shows. During the past decade, reality television shows have
regularly dominated the top 10 television show ratings. (Coyne et al., 2010). Nonetheless,
research on reality television has been sparse. Some investigators have examined the issue of
reality television viewing and appearance concerns. In one study, researchers found that
watching cosmetic surgery programs increased disordered eating attitudes in women with
pre-existing thin-ideal internalization but not other women (Mazzeo et al., 2007). In another
study an author considered the impact of cosmetic surgery focused reality programming and
found that such shows had little impact on body image but did promote positive beliefs about
the benefits of cosmetic surgery (Nabi, 2009). The effects of such shows are probably not
alarming but may have some subtle influences. Young adults are more likely to wish to alter
their appearance through cosmetic surgery after having seen cosmetic surgery reality
programming (Markey & Markey 2010; Markey & Markey, 2012). Other research has
suggested that reality television connectedness (i.e., feeling as if one relates personally to the
show content) correlates with a focus on ones appearance (valuing physical appearance as a
major facet of self-esteem), although did not relate to academic performance (Markey &
Markey, 2012). Another study indicated that viewing reality dating shows predicted

adversarial sexual attitudes, a focus on ones appearance, and sexual double standards, but
these correlations were mediated by viewer engagement (Zurbriggen & Morgan, 2006).
Negative outcomes were related more to viewers desires to learn from the shows and beliefs
that they were entertaining and valuable rather than from direct exposure. Dating programs
did not predict real-life sexual behaviors of viewers. Other research suggested that watching
dating shows was related to discussions of sex among teens, but not their expectations for
dating relationships (Vandenbosch & Eggermont, 2011). Several recent studies have
suggested the uses and gratifications approach is particularly useful in understanding the
effects of reality television (Papacharissi & Mendelson, 2007; Nabi et al., 2006).
The study conducted by University of Michigan provides adequate proof that Reality TV
shows have resulted in a change for the worse. A serious disadvantage of reality shows is that
they do not take into consideration the emotional wellbeing of the contestants. It lays
abnormal levels of stress among contestants and even a single negative comment and score
from the jury can demoralize them.
Hall A. (2009) investigated whether viewer perceptions of reality programs' authenticity were
associated with involvement, enjoyment, and perceived learning. Four dimensions of
perceived authenticity were identified: cast eccentricity, representativeness, candidness, and
producer manipulation. Perceptions that the cast was not eccentric, that they were
representative of people the respondents could meet, that they were behaving candidly, and
that the producers were manipulating the show were associated with cognitive involvement.
Cast representativeness was also positively associated with social involvement. Each form of
involvement was associated with enjoyment. Perceptions of the cast members'
representativeness, candidness, and lack of eccentricity were associated with perceived
learning.
Lundy et. al. (2008) conducted a research study to explore college students' consumption
patterns in regard to reality television, their rationale for watching reality shows, their
perceptions of the situations portrayed on these shows, and the role of social affiliation in the
students' consumption of reality television. The results of focus groups indicated that while
participants perceive a social stigma associated with watching reality television, they
continue to watch because of the perceived escapism and social affiliation provided. Meti V.
and Jange S. (2012) made attempt to explore opinion of the students, research scholars, house
maker and teaching faculty's consumption patterns in regard to reality television, their
rationale for watching reality shows, their perceptions of the situations portrayed on these
shows, and its impact on the society based on the sample of 100 respondents in Gulbarga city
of Karnataka state. The results discussed are on types of television programmes viewed,
rating of most watched reality shows and its impact on society.

Significance of the study:

Media content analysis is an integral part of media studies and research that heighten media
users or citizens understanding of the society. Media programmes particularly telecast
shows, are bound to have positive or negative impact on society. Television is arguably the

most pervasive mass medium because it combines sound and pictures and no skills are
necessary for the audience to watch or enjoy them. Today, reality shows with celebrities acts
as a clutter-breaking property for viewers; they provide increased visibility and a chance to
reach out to a larger TV-viewing audience. Even though the star quotient is important as it
attracts viewers instantly, reality shows keep viewers glued to TV monitor even when the
presence of stars is less relevant. Thus it is of great importance that the impact of reality
shows on society is assessed.

Statement of the problem:

For most of the people, Television has become an idiot box because they have found
some negative influences of Television Shows where the youth are watching too much
television that leads to obesity and other risky behaviour in them. The youth that spend a lot
of time in watching television do not spend enough time being physically active. Television
itself also promotes risky behaviours in youth to react upon. On Television shows, Youth are
often portrayed doing drugs, smoking, drinking and having premarital sex. Since Reality TV
is believed to be true life, people come to expect that the things that they watch on the shows
will happen in real life and people start acting negatively towards others. When it comes to
influence, Reality TV definitely has an impact on people. Many of them start wearing more
revealing clothes even to the extent that they get the cosmetic surgery done because thats
what the girls do on the shows. Reality TV shows have adverse influence on the minds of the
youth, as they project that it is fine to behaviours like being aggressive, using abusive
language, jealousy and have provocation dressing. It can create disturbance in youths life and
make one life stressful.
These shows basically have pros and cons. The pros are information penetration, enhanced
creativity and innovation in entertainment, employment opportunities for the people behind
the reality television shows, awareness on social issues and so on. The cons include children
imitating vulgar gestures, watching adult content, listening to abusive language, creates rift in
the family relationship, resorting to adventurous/dangerous game shows, placing importance
on materialistic pleasures than value systems (Josephson, 1995).
So, research is important to arouse awareness among people especially among youth and
women as they are the most vulnerable groups in society. The youth have to understand that
their obsession with reality shows can bring disaster for them instead of fame to their life.
Moreover, this study can bring out some unexpected and serious fact of reality shows which
will make people realize the significance of the practice of television viewing, especially the
true meaning of reality show in their life.
Keeping in mind the above problems I decided to study the opinions of youth regarding the
influence of reality shows on society.

Aims & Objectives:

The aim of this study is to prove that reality shows are contributing towards the crisis of
identity among people these days as they are following and imitating the lives of the people
being shown in the reality TV shows which are not real. And here, the cultivation theory of
mass media comes into picture which says that TV is responsible for shaping peoples minds
and cultivating a kind of behavior in them which is actually not theirs.
Here, the first objective is to identify the various types of reality television programs watched
by the people and to understand the popularity of these shows.
The second objective is to critically examine the reason behind viewers preference on
watching reality shows.
The third objective is to analyze the reasons of why people tend to adapt these so called real
reel lives and why they are so fascinated towards the lives of reel personalities.
The fourth objective is to assess whether there is any gender influence in the impact of reality
shows among parents and children.

Hypothesis:
1. Reality shows are just the means of entertainment and far from any reality.
2. Reality shows are responsible for identity crisis among people.

Methodology:
The survey method will be used to analyze the popularity and impact of reality shows. There
will be both qualitative and quantitative approach involved to bring out the best result.
Qualitative approach will be required to study the reasons behind watching and following the
reality shows while quantitative approach will be required to find out the various types of
reality shows and their viewers.
Questionnaire will be distributed among a sample size of 100 students. This questionnaire
will consists of 32-items. Participants will be asked to evaluate themselves on each of the 32items with response possibilities ranging from 1-strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree.

Bibliography:

https://www.rjelal.com/3.1.15/ISHA%20SAPRA%2015-17.pdf
http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/yicFWZtMZDkCLQYk6hecnN/The-reality-of-reality-TVin-India.html
https://www.worldwidejournals.com/indian-journal-of-applied-research
www.filmykeeday.com/bestrealityshowinindia
Reeling the Reality: A study on contemporary Reality Shows and their Influence on other
Entertainment Program Genres: Prashanth G. Malur, Nandini Lakshmikantha and Prashanth
V.
A Discriminant Analysis of Viewers' Perception towards Prime Time Television Shows with
special reference to Indore: Dr. Sapna Premchandani, Associate Prof., S.R.G.P. Gujarati
Professional Institute, (DAVV, affiliated) Indore
Impact of Reality Television Shows on Expatriate Indians in Sultanate of Oman:
Radhakrishnan Subramaniam & Renjith Kumar R.
Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability: Subramaniam. S, Himanshu
Tiwari