LaborNET

  Ask Neale

  Tool of the Week

Review

In The House

Resident Four-Eyes Mark Morey attempts the impossible with this attempt at a serious analysis of Big Brother.

	Big Brother is watching what?

****************

A friend of mine of who works in TV has always said to me, "If you put a camera in someone's face they will always act and play up to the camera. They will do things they would normally never do if it wasn't for the camera. People love to be on TV". And yet again these wise words are so apt for BB.

For a show that started out so slow Big Brother developed a momentum beyond what reality TV junkies could have hoped for. Sure you didn't have to watch every show and at worst you made sure you were home Thursday night for BB uncut and Sunday for the eviction, but how many times did we come home only to sneak the TV on to see who was feeding the chooks.

So was the show a revealing insight into the future where we will have the merging of a variety of communication of communication mediums, electronic and print media, the internet and TV, providing a constant stream of cross promotions. Obviously the cross promotion and placement of products was an immensely successful strategy with companies like Primus gaining a 250% increase in their sales while Pizza Hut, who concentrated their entire advertising budget into BB, received a 15% increase in product sales. Or was it an arm chair participation sport that allowed us to not only to be stimulated by the usual information forums but provided us with the opportunity of being allowed to believe we were exercising some control over a realm that we usually only passively interact with? Or was it just a great show that had people we liked, disliked and were provided with the opportunity to vent our spleen and displeasure at those we thought should never have been there. Why let go when the anger will drive you on?

One of the most interesting things throughout the series that has become more apparent since its conclusion, has been the ability of the housemates to realise they were more than just part of a TV game show. That is, many saw themselves as marketable products in which the show would lay the groundwork for the spoils upon eviction. Surely the best examples of this are Johnnie, Jemma, Peter and to a lesser extent Blair. These media savvy participants, especially Jemma who was in the UK at the time BB was being shown there, have no doubt learnt from shows such as Survivor that the aim is to remain in the game for as long as possible in order to increase one's marketable capacity. If this is not so why then are so many of the participants so gracious in defeat and not be too disparaging about other contestants? That is, unless there was a universal commitment from all housemates to single a person out Anita (who probably could have won if she had been a mute). Got to love the schoolyard mentality even in the world of BB.

The strength of the program in many respects is part science and part luck. The selection process provided the basis for a range of personalities that will engage the widest cross-section of viewers. The luck is obviously whether or not they will be able to both shine as individual personalities in a broader group without being a bunch of wet blankets who bore the audience to tears. Lisa, nice girl but gee wiz. Surely no one would have predicted the success of Sara Marie and undoubtably she was slotted as one of the first to go as she was nominated more times than any other housemate. But the longer she survived the more she turned people around and the stronger her vote became in relation to remaining in the house. To her credit, I think she was one of the first to develop some sort of a game plan in relation to giving the audience what they wanted from her and so she served it up as best she could.

It was quite obvious that the producers had identified Andy to be responsible for the audience titillation, but Sara Marie surprised all. In relation to Andy the Dominatrix, for mine she was the weakest link within the selection process and what was obviously perceived to be one of the contestants they thought would go much further than she did. The producers no doubt worked themselves up into a lather with the prospect of kinky nudity on call, or even when they weren't calling for it. However, the keen eye of the audience saw it for what it was, contrived cynical titillation and not a serious attempt of professional reality TV management. The other interesting point to mention is the inability of the big boofy boys, who just weren't sure what they were supposed to do in relation to having a living male fantasy right before them, produced a flaccid inability to interact with Andy in anything but a superficial and contrived "stand back we should be doing something though I don't know what exactly" approach. Gordon attempted to take up the challenge but even Donkey Boy was just not able to step up other than to pretend to be going for it. But when the crunch time came he didn't. This was the most cynical and weakest part of the show.

The other interesting aspect of BB was the way in which the producers developed the characters and maintained their image within the house. For example, Johnnie was portrayed as the manipulative contestant which the audience accepted, yet the housemates felt he was a nice guy and a "good bloke" which is the perception that seems to have gain credence once he left the house. Similarly, Jemma who always showered in her underwear was in fact, caught on camera partially nude before a shower, yet this incident that never made it to TV. Despite this manipulation of character images the viewer was free to melt into the world of what they felt was the reality of the house.

Audiences unquestionably love to escape into other peoples' lives so long as they appear to be more interesting than their own. We have our favourites and the ones we love to hate and what BB allowed us to do was not only compare these people to ourselves and what we would have done but it also allowed us to back "our" winner and take vengeance on those who deserve to go. The audience became one with the program and people felt a great affinity for people they have never met nor probably will never meet. Their humanness was developed and explored by the being able to meet their families and friends. This ensured the characters were more than just one-dimensional game pieces. This drew us in to a point where people felt they had to defend specific competitors. In the case of Sara Marie she became more than a contestant, she became someone we had to defend. I was regaled in my living room with cries of "why should she go, Blair is a little shit who has all the teenage girls voting for him. Give me the phone I'm going to vote for Sara Marie". This came from an individual who initially thought the show was ridiculous but inevitably was drawn in and discovered that she was able to recall all the days' activities from that day in the house. Build it and they shall come!

BB was a success and it was more than a ratings winner it was quality reality TV. Rather than being dumped to some obscure 11:00 pm time slot, as is the case with most things that Channel 10 develop, it remained strong and delivered us what we wanted real (although slightly manipulated) reality TV. How many more sleeps to Survivor 3 or BB Celebrity?

  Do you want to evict Mark from Labor Council? Vote Here!

  View entire issue - print all of the articles!

  Issue 103 contents

»	Survey Shows Majority Support for Unions
»	Howard's Union Stooge in Hot Water
»	Unions Cash in on Big Brother
»	Big Boys Bully Over Della Compo Changes
»	Where's WorkCover? Safety Prosecutions Drop Off
»	Telstra's Ultimatum: Stay Away From Kim
»	Workers Win Stake in New Bank
»	Hours Test Case Gets Green Light
»	St John of God Workers Pray for Justice
»	Five-Star Action From Security Guards
»	Howard Plans to Stop the Vote
»	Rio Outrage Heads for Court
»	Nurses To Fight For Pay
»	One Hundred Reasons to Save Aussie Post
»	Rail Track Sell-Off Part of Privatisation Push
»	Coles Myer Abandons Regional Jobs
»	Qld Wage Rise Still Not Enough
»	Activists Notebook

»	The Soapbox
»	The Locker Room
»	Trades Hall
»	Tool Shed

»	Problems with Hunter Decision
»	A Lost Cause
»	High Farce

Notice Board
- Check out the latest events

Latest Issue

View entire latest issue
- print all of the articles!

Previous Issues

Subject index

Search all issues

© 1999-2000 Labor Council of NSW

LaborNET is a resource for the labour movement provided by the Labor Council of NSW

[ Privacy Statement | Disclaimer | Credits ]

LaborNET is proudly created, designed and programmed by Social Change Online for the Labor Council of NSW