The three reality TVs I had time to watch include the American Chopper, The Generations Project and Project Greenlight. The basic premises of the three shows are the contrasting attitudes of father and son as they try to achieve very strict deadlines for building custom choppers, a reality TV show on how individuals with questions on their family history can investigate by revealing secrets of their ancestors and is a contest and documentary series featuring on amateur filmmaking. As a viewer, there is a lot to be won in that the three shows are really interesting and focuses on our strengths and weaknesses. This is because reality TVs have made us become glued to our screens. According to Rushie (4),
The subject of reality TV shows, however, has been impossible to avoid. Their success is the media story of the (new) century, along with the ratings triumph of the big-money game shows such as Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? Success on this scale insists on being examined because it tells us things about ourselves, or ought to.
This points that reality TV is a reflection of what we are exactly today and thus presents interesting topics
Project Generation was not only the film I had never watched but was also the one in which the contestants were eliminated on the basis of the quality of written scripts. In the same show, there were hosts in the different episodes and their role was to primarily gauge the levels of performances of the contestants. Within the episode that has elimination as the theme; the contestants are allowed to present their projects to a team of reviewers.
A critical analysis of the project is done by the team, strengths and weaknesses pointed out and the presenter is eliminated depending on the analysis of the projects presented. In Project Generations, I had the opportunity to view very different personality traits. The editing process is done in coherence with the plot and follows a systematic manner from the initial stages of projects’ developments to the announcement of the winner. Music plays a very critical role and changes with the moods and the themes. The movement of the camera changes regularly and affects all aspects of the show in regards to mood. The show is generally compounded by unfair tactics with most contestants trying to outdo one another by the application of a variety of ways. These include the formation of alliances to eliminate a contestant viewed as a threat. Stereotyping is a common theme in the show with beauty and sex overemphasized. The judgment made is based on sex and begins once a contestant steps on stage. Project Greenlight is a successful show that I believe has an in-depth analysis of how we react to failure and achievement.
The discussions of the origin and future of reality TV have been characterized by some controversy within the scientific, religious and philosophical circles. The central question remains what future anthropologists will conclude of us in centuries to come. These critical questions in regard to our future have not been without controversies, even among the most ardent and addicted lovers of reality TVs. What would appear to have been the case is that that true drive towards the inception of this genre in entertainment has not been fully researched. Today, the most difficult questions to answer include Francine Prose’s in which she ponders what future anthropologist would come out with from studies of the reality TV we are glued to our screens watching today.
According to Francine Prose’s, what might future anthropologists (or, for that matter, contemporary TV-addicted children and adults) conclude about our world if these programs constituted their primary source of information? The most obvious lesson to be drawn from reality TV, the single philosophical pole around which everything else revolves, is that the laws of natural selection are even more brutal, inflexible, and sensible than one might suppose from reading Origin of Specie.
Previous researcher on the role of reality TV has indicated that much of the most reality TV shows are primarily based on some form of competition. Towards this, producers attempts to make us change how we understand ourselves through our own personal reflections especially during times of difficulties. Placing us at the central position to make right decisions during times of crisis, reality goes an extra mile to expound on our ability as human beings to survive. Some of these shows are highly hyped that they fail to achieve the central theme.
Many reality TV shows show how we effectively use our fear as a source of strength. In the lost, the map of the territory is widely first as a persuasive strategy to persuade the reader to stay focused and never give up and to reinforce our superior ability as human beings to find direction in times of crisis. “Like the paper maps (or GPS coordinates) that we use when navigating a particular territory, people also have mental maps which they use to navigate that territory” (Miller & Dispenzio, 57).
Let’s start with the contestants. Most producers of reality TV shows would like you to believe they’ve picked a group of people who span a broad spectrum of human diversity. But if you took the demographics of the average reality show and applied them to the population at large, you’d end up with a society that was 90 percent white, young and beautiful.
Our inability to dissect the true nature of reality TV is based on the premise that we fail to critically think of the need to understand the role of entertainment. This is because we tend to move in line with what we watch in our TV rooms. The meaning of critical thinking in a social context is quite different from measuring student participation, student performance, or system usability. In this context, it refers to our ability to achieve the best from reality TV and make us answer relevant questions that compound our daily lives.
In addition, critical thinking that will ultimately enable us make in-depth assessments not limited to the one-off assessment of a statement for its correctness, but the dynamic activity, in which critical perspectives on a problem develop through both individual analysis and social interaction. While developing and constructing meaning solely remains with an individual, the process of critical thinking also incorporates the application of meaning structures to the specifics of the context. This is, if meaning is to be more than belief it must go beyond an individual internal reflection. Therefore, the truth of concepts can be determined through collaborative action and involvement of other people in the society. This collaboration calls for teamwork spirit among the members of the society and this can be achieved through harmonious coexistence. Reality TV offers the best in achieving these objectives in that it portrays our insecurities and the fear of losing a battle.
Critical thinking refers to correct thinking in the pursuit of relevant and reliable information and knowledge about the world while others define it as the involvement of reasonable, responsible, reflective, and skillful thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe in or perform. Therefore, a person who thinks critically is able to ask appropriate questions, gather relevant information efficiently and creatively. Furthermore, the person should be able to sort through this information, reason logically from this information, and come to reliable and trustworthy conclusions about the world that enable one to live and act successfully in it. It is also noted that critical thinking is not being able to process information well enough to know to stop for red lights or whether you received the correct change at the supermarket.
However, this is low-order thinking, critical and useful though it may be, is sufficient only for personal survival; most individuals master this. Paul, (39), further suggests that true critical thinking is higher-order thinking. This kind of thinking, enabling a person to, for instance, responsibly judge between political candidates in a country, serve on a murder trial jury, evaluate society’s need for nuclear power plants, and assess the implications of global warming. In addition, critical thinking calls for patience in such of the truth behind any given information. Below is the analysis of film and result based on critical thinking and analysis of the evidence in the film. One inherent bias in this film is the news on Fox News and how it is leaned towards the republicans’ party in America. A critical analysis of Fox news further reveals that it had some strong correlation with the Bush administration. This has been demonstrated in a number of articles as such incidences are not new to the American society.
The main argument in the film is the biasness of some media companies which have monopolistic tendency in the market. This argument is logically proven. This is because the evidence give to support bias journalism in America in the film is great. This film succinctly illustrates how Fox news network is kind to specific leaders on some specific political issues. In fact, media biasness in reporting has been pointed out to be more rampant in the political arena than any other aspect of our lives. The quality of the evidence given to support poor journalism in America news industry is right and should be encouraged. This is basically because the general population in the world over relies on the news from the media houses to make adjustments related to their social, economical and political lives. This capacity is compromised when the quality of such information is distorted.