<<

THE ETHICS OF PRODUCERS (Richard Crew) After producing television documentaries for 14 years, I closed my production company to begin doctoral studies. One year later, was broadcast. As the ‘reality television’ fad snowballed, I became curious about the ethical principles producers apply when they create ‘reality’ television. I decided to examine ‘reality’ shows for two reasons. First, I was intrigued by this new generation of programs that fall at the ‘fiction’ end of a fact/fiction continuum for viewers. And second, several of my former employees have been working on these shows, providing a cooperative and candid sample of reality television production personnel. I interviewed four producers at various levels of reality television production – an , a field producer, a supervising producer, and a . They were not working on the same reality show when interviewed, so the picture formed here is not representative of a specific show. My questions were framed by two ethical concerns. First, that non-professional actors be treated in a fair and responsible manner, and second, that program makers present the stories of ordinary people and their experiences in an ethical manner. Failing to treat non-professional actors fairly can have serious consequences, especially for psychologically unsuited participants. In 1997 the first contestant banished from a Swedish reality show threw himself under a train. Richard Levak, a consulting psychologist believes that many reality TV shows would not be allowed to take place if they were overseen by the same regulations that guard volunteers’ rights in psychological experiments. This was a priority, however, for the executive producer that I interviewed. An important part of his job was to prepare participants for what would happen to them, as well as to help them deal with the situation if they were voted off the show. Furthermore, he claimed, he makes it very clear to his employees that cast members should be accurately portrayed, both in taping and editing. When I talked with production personnel below the executive producer level, however, I heard a different story. The supervising producer and the story editor I interviewed both told me that ethical direction had never been given to them by their executive producers. Rather, they were directed to ‘create entertaining stories’. According to the supervising producer, this direction comes from the TV networks. Specifically, network representatives insist that reality shows be ‘cast’ with characters that, when put together, will create conflict. This leads to compelling drama, they say, and the resulting drama should deliver the escape and entertainment that viewers seek. Some ex-reality show participants informed me that producers made alcohol freely available during the tapings, significantly affecting their behaviour. It appears that the ‘create entertainment’ directives from the networks carry messages that contribute to show producers’ ethical behaviour. For example, since ‘conflict’ is a network requirement, producers accordingly cast their shows with a volatile mix of characters. But if the casting doesn’t produce the desired conflict and drama, producers know they may have to manipulate the conditions under within the cast members perform. Producers can vary the tasks and games required of show participants to build friction, or they can simply open during recordings. Also, producers can always heighten drama during the editing process. This ‘cheating footage’, according to the story editor, is necessary because members don’t always demonstrate on camera how they really feel. They can, however, usually verbalize their feelings when interviewed one-on-one by producers. So producers can manufacture scenes out of surveillance footage to visually portray the feelings discussed in the interviews. One of the tools used for ‘cheating footage’ is an editing technique termed the ‘Franken bite’. This is the production jargon for ‘Frankenstein bite’, something which all the producers I interviewed admitted having used. To them, this practice is acceptable if it depicts the character’s point of view. A female cast member from a well-known show claimed that she was victimized by this technique, through the creative editing of her words, which were taken from the many different days on which she was taped, and them cut into a single embarrassing scene. The field producer I interviewed was actually present during this taping and confirmed that the event did not happen as shown. My interviews suggest that ethical standards to protect non-professional cast members’ psychological well-being are in place. But since producers are required to make myriads of decisions during the production process, they mostly operate without ethical direction from their superiors. The networks want entertainment on these programs, so the opportunity exists for an individual’s ethical standards to be crowded out by pragmatic considerations for audience stimulation and successful ratings. The ultimate portrayal of cast members on a reality show appears to be left to the discretion of different production personnel going about their work to ‘create interesting stories’. Adapted from ‘Media ethics’. 1. Who did the interview for his research into reality television? a. a random selection of television company employees. b. the production team of a particular reality TV show. c. a number of people who had once worked for him. d. the top executives of a TV network. 2. What does the case of the 1997 Swedish reality TV show contestant demonstrate? a. that reality TV shows should be banned. b. that reality TV show contestants don’t like being voted off. c. that contestants should have psychological tests before being accepted. d. that reality TV programmes need tighter control. 3. One of the main tasks of the executive producer interviewed was to a. select compatible contestants for the show. b. help contestants to cope with rejection by the public. c. tape and edit the show accurately. d. advise contestants during the show. 4. According to television network representatives, audiences enjoy a. shows in which there are personality clashes. b. a wide variety of personalities involved in the shows. c. seeing contestants who have consumed too much alcohol. d. watching a well-directed drama. 5. If a show is not dramatic enough, producers are expected to a. replace less interesting contestants. b. provoke tension between contestants. c. ask contestants to improve to improve their performance. d. arrange for certain contestants to be voted off. 6. Producers can use technology to show how contestants really feel by a. showing interviews which have had words removed. b. showing face-to-face interviews with them. c. filming them secretly without their knowledge. d. mixing private conversations with separately filmed material. 7. The writer concludes that the unethical treatment of reality TV contestants is a. unfortunate but accidental. b. standard policy of TV networks. c. a result of the drive for high audience figures. d. something audiences want to see.

Source: Complete CAE. Student’s Book with answers. Guy Brook-Hart and Simon Haines. Ed. Cambridge