Click to play videoNobody can get enough of reality TV shows. People, and politicians, get scandalized watching them but won’t switch off their TV sets.
MPs wanted controversial reality TV show Sach Ka Saamna banned for allegedly offending Indian sensibilities. The Delhi High Court said no.
"Our culture is not so fragile that it would be affected by one TV programme. Those who don't want to see it can switch off their TV sets or can watch any other channel,” said the court last week while rejecting a petition.
Do viewers have the will to switch off their TVs or are they captive audience of reality TV shows? CNN-IBN’s Bhupendra Chaubey asked this on a debate, Let’s Get Real, to Nikhil Chinappa, VJ and host of the reality TV show Splitsvilla, psychologist Dr Sonia Mehta, Rahul Mahajan, winner of the reality TV show Big Boss II, actress and talent show host Kiron Kher, and actress Urvashi Dholakia, a participant in Sach Ka Saamna.
For the political view on the issue there was Bharatiya Janata Party leader B P Singhal.
Is reality TV promoting voyeurism?
A clear majority of the audience in the show said reality TV shows sometimes embarrassed them. But yet they watched them, said Dholakia.
“I have been a single mother for long but yet the same questions are asked to me. I decided to be on (Sach Ka Saamna) so that people can know me. I am not ashamed of anything I said on the show. There are things which people wanted to know about me and that is why they watched the show,” she said.
The hullabaloo over reality shows reflects the attitudes of Indian society, said Kher. “Indian society functions on shame, not guilt. Conscience is not the parameter for what one should be doing--as long neighbours or people around you don’t come to know it’s okay,” she said.
Mahajan said Big Boss II and other reality TV shows were “entertainment” and if viewers found them offensive they could switch to “400 other channels”.
Mehta agreed: people watched reality shows because they were entertained. “The viewer is entertained, and gets voyeuristic pleasure. ‘My life is miserable but that millionaire or celebrity up there is struggling, too,’” she said. “There is a feeling of ‘gotcha, you are not better than me.’”
Entertainment is poor excuse for the assault on morality, said Singhal. “In the bathroom one is naked--why don’t you show that,” he said, rejecting claim that reality TV was plain entertainment.
Government as TV censor
Singhal believed reality TV shows were “bruising the souls” of participants and viewers and need to be regulated. “We have the model of the Film Censor Board, of which I was the chairman a year. We could very easily cut away those portions which were not considered desirable,” he said.
“Straightaway they (reality TV shows) must be subject to preview and censor,” said Singhal, who believed the Government can’t close its eyes to offensive content on TV.
Then people should close their eyes to Parliament so they don’t have to watch the “rubbish that goes on there,” said Chinappa. “I am fine with regulation but I am not fine with censorship.”
Dholakia, too, opposed censorship by politicians, for she believed they don’t practise what they preached. “They throw chairs and shoes at each other in Parliament--that is also watched (on TV). Doesn’t that too affect the nation,” she said.
Regulation is needed but perhaps not by the Government, said Kher. “A regulatory body made up of serious individuals who are educated and have a balanced mind,” she suggested.
Real is for real
Mehta believed reality TV shows fulfill a need in life. “There are lot of things (in shows) that real life or culture doesn’t fulfill. There is no problem that it can’t be talked about; every thing can be resolved (on reality TV). We watch humiliation but we think that person really deserves it. We enjoy this emotional degradation or elevation,” she said.
Kher believed watching reality TV was a bit like voyeurism. “There is a voyeur in all of us but while doing this let us not completely put aside grace and dignity. I don’t think they should be censored but there should be a regulatory body,” she said.
For Singhal that voyeurism was a disturbing “attitude”. “Are we going to enjoy the misery and humiliation of fellow humans? Is that the only diet left for us to consume? This what these show are purporting,” he said.
But are reality TV shows really real? Yes and no, said Chinappa.
“On any reality show 240 hours of footage is shot for a 60-minute programme. What you see are the best edited bits, so it will be never complete reality but what is most entertaining. Please understand that when you watch any reality show on any channel,” he said.
That is the truth about reality TV. And if you are offended, or not entertained, change the channel.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
 |
 |
 |
|
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.