Contemporary television – media content exchange or exchange of cultures
Different researchers analyze media capacity to transform cultural conceptions and to form nationally differentiated cultural community. French scholars Olivier Mongin, Marc-Olivier Padis, Jean-Francois Barbier-Bouvet and Richard Robert divided the contemporary culture based on media interaction to two large areas – storage culture and culture de flux. 3 The first model belongs to the traditional art forms, which are publicly presented in their authentic type and they could not be creatively rewritten. The second model characterizes the traditional media (press, radio, television), which offer the completed artifacts and cultural models, and represented their cultural code to the media audience.
The new media (Internet, social networks, online journalism) are a combination between these two areas. They show the idea of culture as software, explicated by the German sociologist Ulrich Beck. It allows for supplementing, enrichment and exchange of existent cultural traditions and norms with new messages, notions and perceptions. Culture is realized as an open code, which the media audience can use through its own perception and personal social environment. 4
This may explain some changes in the contemporary media, especially in television programs. Although audience with different national, cultural and social peculiarities watch TV shows, media formats influence over the way media viewers react to the media content. The television producers set in the media formats definite socio-cultural models, which are general as cultural meaning and social behavior. In this way, the formats may be realized and replayed by the different participants as well as by the viewers, independently of current show specifics or national peculiarities. Or like Denis McQual wrote: “Audiences are both a product of social context (which leads to shared cultural interests, understandings, and information needs) and a response to a particular pattern of media provision. Often they are both at the same time, as when a medium sets out to appeal to the members of a social category or the residents of a certain place. Media use also reflects broader patterns of time use, availability, lifestyle, and everyday routines.’ 5
Of course, presenting of one and the same programs to different audience may be interpreted with the globalization process and transnational information flows. Today the access to information is easier, especially in the Internet, and often the media content cannot be adapted to the media audience increasing in quality and personal interest. But there are some considerable problems. The first is concerned with the media reliability. The question is how media reality may reflect public space objectively and correctly. And also if the production of media information from the newsroom editorial stuff is professional or it is a result of definite manipulative methods aiming to form the public opinion on given social themes.
Another important problem refers to the so called media post-colonialism. It presents definitive cultural domination (most of all US culture and lifestyle) through the worldwide media audience. That is why the media heroes’ demonstrative social behavior is sometimes incomprehensible and can violate the traditional cultural, social and religious norms.
Reality TV – cross point between media information truth and media consumption increasing
If we examine in more details the media content changes and especially the television ones, we will consider that the appearance of new media formats enriches the television space and enlarges media audience consumption. The television models are not always product of media producers’ and media companies’ willingness to increase their profits, but also an answer of media audience needs and an option for viewers to express their conceptions and notions. Reality TV is such worldwide popular format. Probably the shortest definition of Reality TV refers to “programmes where the unscripted behaviour of “ordinary people’ is the focus of interest’. 6
Another characteristic of Reality TV can be read in texts of some other scholars. According to Jonathan Bignell “it might represent a new kind of access to, and interest in, ordinary people on television that can air important issues about identity and community in contemporary society.’ 7 And Bill Nicholls argues that reality TV exhibits a strategy of deterrence that distances the television audience from reality, rather than seeking to represent and interpret it. 8
Reality TV features most of all follow market – driven journalism model – profits increasing, media product creating, which can be sold in different media markets, production cost reduction and media content editing, which can answer to previously declared expectations of media audience, permanent holding of television viewers attention, attraction of advertisers etc.
The Reality TV development is a continuous process, and its nature results from the combination of different media forms– documentary television, tabloid journalism and popular entertainment. The documentary television form was popular in the 1970s and 1980s, especially in US and British television programs. It includes interesting human stories, personal dramas, fun stories, with high level of truthiness, and a plot separated into lots of series. The television communication defines this genre as docusoap – a mix between documentary and soap operas. Jonathan Bignell wrote that Reality TV is a docusoap form with its emphasis on personal stories and relaxed attitude to documentary’s claim of veracity, seems to be based around entertainment rather than the sobriety of documentary is not in itself a reason to devalue it as a television form. Its blending and blurring of genres and its dramatization of the real can be just as effective for the working through of the stakes of social life and its strictures as the sobriety of conventional documentary. What is different, and this is a significant rider to that point, is Reality TV’s lack of acknowledgement of itself as social commentary except in the most basic ways. According to him reality TV has gradually emerged as a designation that describes programmes characterized by a controlled environment, lacking documentary’s heritage of interest in social action. It is closer to entertainment and increasingly replaces entertainment in the schedules. 9
It is a fact the Realty TV invasion in the documentary television changes all of the documentary programmers – including documentary journalism, documentary realism, and, observational documentary. Typical for Reality TV is the clearly indicated connection between documentary television and soap operas in respect of series parts. Some Reality TV programs are broadcast on air, but most of them are firstly fitting the information and after that it is edited. All of the Reality TV productions use characteristic participants. Usually the participants’ choice is set up previously from television producers and scriptwriters, and on the castings definitive characters, and not contributors’ spontaneity is what is looked for. Because of it on the screen most of the participants demonstrate well-known behavior or familiar game strategy. They have been already watched different Reality TV programs and they knew the preferences of media audience.
The second Reality TV format is tabloid journalism. Its development started at beginning of the 20th century and it is typical for the US newspapers firstly, and then – for the British press. The tabloid journalism perfectly mixes truth and fake stories, popular and ordinary people information, sensations, gossips, political scandals, crime stories, and an interesting investigating journalism. The broadcast media appearance only helped for the tabloid journalism in the public space. The tabloid TV is an excellent example for the huge influence, which scandal and sensational stories documentary has on the public opinion making.
The third Reality TV form – the popular entertainment refers to programs such as talkshows, gameshows, where the leading role is the entertainment function of media. The attention of media audience is chained to the insignificant, unimportant, relieve from busy work, to the entertainment in general. The Dutch television producer John de Mol, one of the Reality TV apologists and a creator of the most popular Reality TV show “Big Brother’ argued that the only important thing for him is to entertain people, and this is a purpose he is following with every his new show. 10
Such programs programming on the channel prime time or in the zones around it helps media audience to segment their watching time and correctly form their agenda setting, in accordance to the use of media content.
The prime Reality TV target is young viewers. That provokes the television producers to impose young participants mainly with similar appearance, behavior, and perception. Also they use different means for commercial products advertising, which are designed for young audience, through hidden ads or product positioning.
The Reality TV actively relies on the media audience feedback. During the time of reality shows inquiries with viewers are done or some cross media methods are used in order to keep the audience attention – offering different products, using different media channels, opportunities to vote in the program’ site. The viewers have the illusion of partnership with the media producer or of their significance due to the opportunity to vote for one or another participant. That model corresponds to the so called SMS-democracy, which not always has been understood positively – as a persuasive communication form.
The Reality TV bears some known media characteristics. But its popularity and media usability provoke other media formats, including media information and the news, to change their own traditional model.
Conclusion
The Reality TV exceptional success is connected with the way these programs win media audience interest. Viewers may see themselves and their own problems in the persons of show participants; it is staked on his primary reaction, on his voyeur wish, on the banal, scandal and provocative behavior. At the same time these programs give to the media audience the feeling that their vote may control the show. And though these programs focus on the entertainment, activity and over-communication, they have a socialized impact too.
It is important to mark the extent to which the Reality TV is situated between media manipulation and media pluralism. Indeed many of Reality TV participants declare that their participation have been manipulated. In those programs television producers and media companies rely on the previously researched expectations of the media audience. Many of them present the dominant social group viewpoint, typical for the majority of the media audience. The definitive press on the public opinion may be done through preliminary editing of the Documental Reality content, especially when programs are not presented live.
But the Reality TV has important social influence, connected with new meaning it gives to the media pluralism. All these productions present different social types; they try to overcome some ethnical, religious and sexual prejudices. The Reality TV shows give a chance for a public comment on significant social problems and they overrule the existing social conflicts. In the future this TV format will be successfully developed and many of its elements will be used by the other television programs. And this will transform the media and media audience, as well as the society in general.
APPENDIX
Fig.1 Competition Reality TV programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
Big Brother
2004
Nova TV
35%
Endemol
Big Brother 2
2005
Nova TV
36.4%
Endemol
Big Brother 3
2006
Nova TV
53.5%
Endemol
VIP Brother
2006
Nova TV
42.6%
Local version
Survivor
2006
bTV
53%
CBS
VIP Brother 2
2007
Nova TV
41.5%
Local version
Survivor 2
2007
bTV
33%
CBS
Big Brother 4
2008
Nova TV
43.7%
Endomol
VIP Brother 3
2008
Nova TV
48.6%
Local version
Survivor 3
2008
bTV
50.4%
CBS
Fort Boyard
2008
bTV
56.1%
Channel 4
Survivor 4
2009
bTV
45.5%
CBS
Fort Boyard 2
2009
bTV
49.9%
Channel 4
Big Brother Family
2010
Nova TV
38.6%
Local version
Fort Boyard 3
2010
bTV
36.7%
Channel 4
Fig.2 Personal Improvement and Makeover Reality TV programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
Extreme Makeover
2007
Nova Television
30.7%
ABC
Temptation Island
2007
Nova Television
20%
Fox
Cheaters
2008
Diema
6.4%
Bobby Goldstein
Тhe moment of truth
2009
Nova Television
20%
Lighthearted Entertainment
The truth about us
2010
Nova Television
17.6%
Lighthearted Entertainment
Farmer Wants a Wife
2011
Nova Television
15.4%
FremantleMedia
Fig.3 Aspiration Reality TV programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
The Magnificent Six
2008
bTV
51.1%
Local version
The Magnificent Six 2
2010
bTV
48%
Local version
The Great Bulgarians
2006
BNT 1
-
BBC-The Great Britons
The Big Read
2008
BNT 1
-
BBC-The Big Read
The Little Big Read
2011
BNT 1
-
Local version
Life as We Know It
2006-2012
bTV
-
Local version
Lost in Bulgaria
2011
Nova televsion
13.8%
Local version
Fig.4 Social experiment Reality TV programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
The Lives of Others
2008
BNT 1
21%
Local version
Wife Swap
2009
bTV Action
-
Endemol
Wife Swap 2
2010
bTV Action
-
Endemol
Wife Swap 3
2010
bTV Action
-
Endemol
Fig.5 Musical Competition Reality TV programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Marker Share
License
Star Academy
2005
Nova Television
18.9%
Endomol
5 Stars
2005
bTV
23.8%
Local version
Music Idol
2007
bTV
49.9%
ITV-Pop Idol
Music Idol 2
2008
bTV
48.5%
ITV-Pop Idol
Music Idol 3
2009
bTV
44%
ITV-Pop Idol
Bulgaria’s Got Talent
2010
bTV
52%
BBC- Britain’s Got Talent
X Factor
2011
Nova Television
63.2%
FremantleMedia
The Voice of Bulgaria
2012
bTV
70 %
Talpa Media
Fig.6 Dancing Competition Reality TV programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
Dancing Stars
2008
bTV
29.2%
BBC-Strictly Come Dancing
Dancing Stars 2
2009
bTV
41.4%
BBC-Strictly Come Dancing
VIP Dance
2009
Nova Television
25%
Endemol-Strictly dancing
Bailando
2010
Nova Television
12.4%
Endemol-Bailando
Fig.7 Fear-Based Reality TV programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
Mediums
2008
bTV
51.5%
Local version
Mediums 2
2009
bTV
30.6%
Local version
Fear Factor
2009
Nova Televison
28%
Endemol
Fig.8 Professional Reality TV programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
Lord of the Chefs
2011
bTV
19.23%
Local version
Cherry on the cake
2011-2012
Nova Televison
34%
Local version
Star Machine
2012
TV7
25%
Casting
2012
BNT 1
-
Local version
Fig.9 Quiz show Reality programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
Who Wants to Be a Millionaire
2001 - now
Nova Television
37%
Endomol
Deal or No Deal
2005 - now
Nova Television
20%
Endomol
Fig.10 Talk Show Reality programs in Bulgaria
Name
Year
Television
Market Share
License
The Promise
2011
BNT 1
-
Local version
Referendum
now
BNT 1
27.5%
Local version
Pyramid
2006
bTV
-
Local version
Pyramid
2011
bTV Action
-
Local version
Direct democracy
2011
ТV7
-
Local version
-
Kevin Williams, European Media Studies, Hodder Arnold, 2005, p. 18-19. ↩
-
In: Kevin Williams, European Media Studies, Hodder Arnold, 2005, p. 51. ↩
-
See Оливие Монжен, Марк.-Оливие Пади, Ришар Робер, Интернет, четенето и изливащата се култура, Култура, бр.22, 31.05.2002. ↩
-
See Улрих Бек, Що е глобализация? Заблудите на глобализма – отговори на глобализацията, Критика и хуманизъм, 2002, p. 77. ↩
-
Denis McQual, Audience Analysis, Sage Publications, Inc., 1997, p. 2. ↩
-
Jonathan Bignell, Big Brother.Reality TV In The Twenty-First Century, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, p. 1. ↩
-
Jonathan Bignell, p.4 . ↩
-
Jonathan Bignell, p. 5. ↩
-
Jonathan Bignell, p. 18, p. 25. ↩
-
In: Албена Борисова, Джон де Мол направи интимното публично, Сега, 22.09.2005. ↩
-
Frau-Meigs, D. Big Brother and Reality TV in Europe: Towards a Theory of Situated Acculturation by the Media, European Journal of Communication (2006), p. 47. ↩
-
Annette Hill, Reality TV. Audiences and popular factual television, Routledge, 2005, p. 21. ↩
-
Frau-Meigs, D. Big Brother and Reality TV in Europe: Towards a Theory of Situated Acculturation by the Media, European Journal of Communication (2006), p. 39. ↩
-
Jonathan Bignell,.Big Brother.Reality TV In The Twenty-First Century, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, p. 35, p. 48. ↩
-
In: Албена Борисова, Джон де Мол направи интимното публично, Сега, 22.09.2005. ↩
-
In: Magder, T. The End of TV 101: Reality Television, Formats and the New Business of Television – Reality TV: Remaking Television Culture, 2004, p. 137. ↩
-
In: Оля Желева, Весела Табакова: В риалити шоуто се проектират митове и мечти, Новинар, 23.10.2006. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка Филева, Мария Попова (ред.), Медийното производство: бутик и конфекция в медиите. Дневник на Втория медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’ 10-14 декември 2007, София, Авангард прима, 2008, p. 69. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка Филева, Мария Попова (ред.), Медийното производство: бутик и конфекция в медиите. Дневник на Втория медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’ 10-14 декември 2007, София, Авангард прима, 2008, p. 59-60. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка Филева, Мария Попова (ред.), Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика. Дневник на Медийния панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’ 11-15 декември 2006, София, Горекс прес, 2007, p. 25. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка Филева, Мария Попова (ред.), Медийното производство: бутик и конфекция в медиите. Дневник на Втория медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’ 10-14 декември 2007, София, Авангард прима, 2008, p. 57. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка Филева, Мария Попова (ред.), Преход в медиите и медии в преход. Дневник на Четвъртия медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’ 30 ноември – 4 декември 2009 г., София, Авангард прима, 2010, p. 53. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, П. Филева, Мария Попова (ред.) Медиен плурализъм и медийно разнообразие. Дневник на третия Медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’, 1-5 декември 2008 г., София, Авангард прима, 2009, p. 45. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка Филева, Мария Попова (ред.) Медиен плурализъм и медийно разнообразие. Дневник на третия Медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’, 1-5 декември 2008 г., София, Авангард прима, 2009, p. 40. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка. Филева, Мария Попова (ред.) Медиен плурализъм и медийно разнообразие. Дневник на третия Медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’, 1-5 декември 2008 г., София, Авангард прима, 2009, p. 45-46. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка Филева, Мария Попова (ред.) Медиен плурализъм и медийно разнообразие. Дневник на третия Медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’, 1-5 декември 2008 г., София, Авангард прима, 2009, p. 43. ↩
-
In: Мария Нейкова, Петранка. Филева, Мария Попова (ред.) Медиен плурализъм и медийно разнообразие. Дневник на третия Медиен панаир ”Журналисти по теория, журналисти на практика’, 1-5 декември 2008 г., София, Авангард прима, 2009, p. 46. ↩