English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i want to know is..... what points can prove that reality tv show should be banned. de answer must be yes....it should be banned...but why?

2006-06-18 19:33:46 · 8 answers · asked by Joshualaw 1 in Politics & Government Government

8 answers

Reality TV takes away jobs from working actors. As anyone can be a reality TV star, the Screen Actor's Guild doesn't get any revinue from the reality people.
Also, it puts writers out of work.
One more thing, many REALITY tv shoes aren't actually REALITY. Many things are cut and edited so we can't see them all. If not banned, they should at least be renamed to something more appropriate, like "unscripted TV"

2006-06-18 19:38:55 · answer #1 · answered by IdiotGurl 2 · 1 0

I agree reality shows should be banned because people usually watch T.V to escape reality, or at least that used to be the reason, as far as I'm concerned.
Now it seems no one has enough immagination and when they do come up w/a good show(i.e,surface-- that was good) the T.V stations let people start getting into the show then end it just as it's getting good; only to replace it w/an idiot show like Super Nanny--talk about a numb a$$ show.!!(People don't know how to make their children mind?)
The media seems to think thats all people want to see because they see the ratings going up, what they don't realize is the only reason anyone watches realality T.V is because there is really nothing else to choose from;so people pick the best out of all the other sht reality shows. The public as a whole needs to boycot reality shows then maybe they'd come up w/something worth watching.
American Idol is O.K. but When you think of all the singers who've paid their dues and NOT made it you've gotta kinda feel for them(even the ones who DID make it and the struggles they went through) when some unknown hits it big w/in a yr. because they were on a show judged by has-beens and people calling in votes. Man THATS gotta burn someone who paid their dues a$$. Survivor is good only because you want to see who can make it. I DON'T believe the shows worth a $million prize though. If the situation ever really arose (which it did w/Katrina) and a person did have to survive 4 real I doubt anyone would be sitting there in the end to hand over a $ million to that person. Is there any immagination left in this country or anywhere else for that matter? If there is, someone please stand up.

2006-06-18 21:57:58 · answer #2 · answered by STACEY S 3 · 0 0

Well... ,
1. Reality tv is traumatising to those acting in it, they go through a swing of real emotions like in the survivor episodes, just for the sake of entertaining other people.
2. Reality tv can cause relationship breakups like in programs where families change spouses and the real family members end up liking other parents instead of their own and that's kinda sickening.

2006-06-18 19:48:32 · answer #3 · answered by ElementRage 1 · 0 0

Sports, Fox News and reality shows are the only TV I can stand these days. My only hope is that the reality shows get more and more depraved.

2006-06-18 19:41:17 · answer #4 · answered by david s 4 · 0 0

I guess the one justification would be the theory that government has the responsibility to protect citizens from themselves.

Reality TV, although popular, is detrimental to anyone that watches and to society as a whole.

Therefore it is the responsibility of the moral to ban it.

-Jon

2006-06-18 19:42:25 · answer #5 · answered by god_of_vb 2 · 0 0

I don't agree that they should be but...

you could argue that they provide no real value to the viewer and that they present legal complications.

For instance: The show "Intervention" shows people who are addicted to drugs recieving an intervention to get clean and sober... Any contract that you sign is considered null and void if you are under the influence of drugs and alcohol. All those people could turn around and sue the producers of the show for illegal contract negotiations and slander - or they could be brought up on charges for witnessing drug use without reporting it to the authorities... see, it gets sticky.

2006-06-18 19:40:32 · answer #6 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 0 0

no longer which you theory isn't a great theory for a actuality instruct, yet... (and that i assumed that replace into fantastically humorous, yet... ...I actually loathe "actuality shows" ordinarily, so i assumed truly of being "humorous," i could be "depressive..." Hee Hee... "Please! not extra actuality instruct suggestions...or i won't be able to deliver you an truly heat and loving happy trip journeys Card this year..." Do make me ought to "answer all your questions" in revenge for this concept approximately "actuality instruct suggestions" which you in user-friendly terms had... Or "Guido," my deranged assistant, would be compelled to scare you at the same time as cleansing off your windshield at a gloomy and lonely interesection someplace... Ya' seize what i'm throwin' acha' 'ear?!? I particular desire so...for Humanity's Sake, Oh Holy Moly!

2016-10-31 02:56:11 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I assume this is for a debate.
well:

It demeans the participants

it gives viewers a skewed view of reality

the participants usually end up worse off after the fleeting fame has worn off.

the producers seek the lowest situations they can put people in, often physically/mentally harming the participants.

the producers are seeking to make money without paying actors.

2006-06-18 19:39:57 · answer #8 · answered by Mac Momma 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers