Reality TV: The ultimate oxymoron

There's an epidemic on TV, inhabiting more and more households across the land. It's making viewers dumber, and making the networks tons of money, while exploiting hundreds of people thirsty for fame. \nThis virus is reality television. \n"Reality" TV? It's the ultimate oxymoron. Is a show that contains up to a dozen story editors, writers and producers who manipulate its cast into doing things that will score with viewers' reality? If anything, reality TV is more like putting a few animals in a cage and triggering controversy and drama among the subjects before it can be considered "reality."\nReality TV is documentaries and the news, things that are actually occurring without outside forces persuading behavior. \nWhy is reality TV so popular? Is it because the stars are pulled from the same streets we stroll, meaning any average Joe is just a touch away from stardom? \nIt's unclear what the moral value of reality TV is. Good fiction shows have lessons learned and commentary on culture. We watch them because they are relatable to our daily lives, whether it's "Melrose Place" or "The O.C." Shows like "The Simple Life" merely reiterate the fact that if you put spoiled socialites on a farm, they tend to struggle a bit. \nYou could actually learn from the shows back in the day on TGIF and TNBC. Those shows, while mildly corny (and by mildly, I mean extremely, overly corny), taught kids worthwhile lessons while entertaining them at the same time. They were wholesome. The worst thing that ever happened in "Full House" was a guy putting the moves on DJ Tanner too quick, making her nervous. Jessie Spano overdosed on caffeine pills on "Saved by the Bell," and that's about as controversial as it got, and everyone loved it. \nOf course, reality TV's founding series, "The Real World," is still going strong. I have to say for as many flaws as it has, it's still one of the best in its genre. It also doesn't attempt to hide the fact that the show isn't set up for seven people to get along, but to make them bicker at each other, get loaded off booze and hit up the hot tub and get frisky. On no other show is drinking encouraged as much as this one. After all, don't we all know that a few drinks is the best way to get a loud, obnoxious mouth? Also, it's the best way to get people seriously pissed off at you. \nMock reality series are just the remedy, and could be done so much more often. "Curb Your Enthusiasm," Larry David's post-"Seinfeld" project on HBO, is a half hour comedy series not done in front of a studio audience. Rather, it is given a more realistic, documentary feel. It's also hands down the funniest show on television these days. "Reno 911!," a Comedy Central mockumentary on the lives of the Reno police force, has its moments as well. \nHave writers just gotten lazy? Rather than to think up a fresh sitcom and write a new show every week, the writers simply come up with scenarios and see what happens. Creativity has taken a serious dive. Once the show has been devised and the characters have been cast, the only real work left is the hours of filming and the occasional twist to spice up any dull moments. \nIs reality TV a bad influence for children? It certainly can't be doing any good. MTV, whose shows are all "reality" besides the rarely aired "Doggy Fizzle Televizzle," milks the reality cow more than anyone. As "The Real World" has aired for the past decade, its characters have progressively become better looking and more out of control. All the while, their target audience has remained 12-to-34-year-olds since its conception. There is very little educational value in "The Real World" for a 12-year-old besides learning when you put seven good looking people with no real jobs in a dream house, they will go bonkers. \nIs reality TV a phase or is it here to stay? People continue to tune in, so it'll be here awhile. Reality TV is a sure bet in many ways for networks, because creating new sitcoms and dramas can be a very expensive mistake. Participants in reality series' don't get paid a dime, other then when the winner of the show receives a cash award (before you think one million dollars is a big payout for a network, remember each cast member of "Friends" receives the same amount per episode). \nAlso with reality TV, if the first season flops, you dig into the pool of infinite scenarios, make a new one and hope it's better. Networks hope for a reality series to succeed far more than a fiction series. Economically, it makes the network a winner. But in the end, after all the shows are about putting rich people on the farm, making girls fight over a rich man and marrying strangers through fan voting, it's the viewer who's losing out.