Will this change reality TV?

I know there has been some discussion about this already, but for those of you who missed it there was a landmark decision this week (no, not ScoCam deciding who to pick on again).
You can read about it here at The Age (thanks to Polly B for sending it in).
Basically a House Rules contestant has sued Seven for workplace bullying. Seven countered that she was not an employee but the NSW Workers Compo Commission found otherwise.
This could open a real can of worms for some of the networks.
Will we see a return to “gentler” reality TV or will the Instafluencer types who go on MKR use it as a chance to up their payday?
While I love the guilty pleasure of some reality shows, things have certainly taken a darker turn in the past few years, with more focus on manufactured drama.
MKR certainly encourages contestants to belittle each other. MAFS is just pure insanity. The Bachelorette allows total douches on the show and while Angie kicked sleazy Jess off, the fact he was allowed there at all after making production staff uncomfortable is not cool. The Block and House Rules rely on sleep deprivation to bring out the worst in people and Keith and ScoCam love to poke the bear for drama.
This is why GBBO is my fave reality show because the most controversial thing that happens there is someone opening a freezer door too often.



  1. agreed it’s nasty tv and people that make the money should extend some care – the UK had a number of suicides by young contestants from Love Island

  2. Interesting. I suppose rtv is a lot like cock fighting, dog fighting or cage fighting. Throw them in and see what they do to each other.

  3. “This is why GBBO is my fave reality show because the most controversial thing that happens there is someone opening a freezer door too often.”

    … that bastard.

    • This is why I like B&B. You can say what you like about Shauna, Ridge, Brooke and The Roach. They aren’t real. 🤣

    • It was a huge deal – the affected contestant cracked it and threw his creation in the bin before judging, leading to #bingate to trend in Twitter. lol

  4. Anyway, like I said in the other thread, I feel like this is a very difficult thing to get a read on. These shows deliberately pick contestants who are going to be loud, obnoxious and controversial, because that’s what gets the attention of the public. Like that quote from the producer. They don’t pick smart people, because smart, emotionally-healthy and rational people self-edit. They pick the ones with no filter precisely for that reason.

    So how do know what’s the fault of targeted editing, and how do we know what’s people simply being called out for being dicks on national television? Where is that line, because I feel like, it’s a really important distinction. We see it every year, some of these people are just selfish and awful (and I’m not sure I really buy the idea that the production crew forced those two House Rulers to be mean, by way of threatening them with a mean edit, because they got a mean edit anyway).

    But on the other hand, you have MKR, which is *so* manipulative. It’s going to end in tears, at some point, and you know the networks aren’t going to care until that happens, when suddenly, they’ll act really sad about it.

    And the truth is, personally, I find it quite shocking when people sign up for MAFS or whatever and end up outraged over the trashiness of the program … nobody held a gun to your head and forced you to enlist on this show, you deliberately made the decision to do so, knowing full well what you were getting into (and not really caring that the whole thing would be a negative experience because you just wanted a few more Instagram followers).

    Honestly, I think a lot of these people have just forgotten the old adage, be careful what you wish for. You wanted low-level reality TV show fame? Congratulations, here it is.

      • A couple of years ago, I had the opportunity to speak with someone from a romance based rtv show and he was shattered at how he felt used and tricked by the girl and production. I replied, “Don’t you watch reality tv?”

        To my surprise, he answered, “No”.

        • I have an emergency at home, the tv has broken down. It could have been worse, it hasn’t happened while MAFS is rolling. The quality of rtv ~ assuming there ever was any is going downhill but then so is society.

          I could count the number rtv contestants who didn’t deserve what they copped on one hand.

          Remember before tv how many people would show up for public executions? Now just tune in to see who’ll be “aliminated” next. Cheap entertainment.

          The deathbed confession of a broken rtv star~

          “Der, I got a bad edit” (Cry, whinge)

          Like, read the brochure before launching your like deluded aspirations for like “fame”. Your nonna will thank you for it.

          • Indeed.

            Personally, I think if you sign up for a national TV program without even watching it beforehand, or knowing anything about it? That’s another kind of stupid, that I’m equally unsympathetic towards.

      • All true. I heard the discussion about this case this morning, and one point stuck in my head – that even contestants who know that there are “roles” for every competition show, they always expect to be the good people. And that is because they (probably fairly enough) see themselves as good, ordinary people. Every contestant expects that someone else will be cast as the “baddies”. So it is a shock when they find out that they have been earmarked as the sacrificial lambs.

        Even then, no matter the role allocated, every contestant wll be criticised or disliked on the feedback, for any action small or large. Many don’t consider how badly that might affect their families, even if they don’t mind for themselves.

        Apparently the contracts are even more draconian than the public knew. One previous lady (can’t remember the show) later built an unrelated, successful business and the show claimed a share of the profits under the contract.

        • I appreciate that “unrelated” looks unfair, but it’s still free publicity.
          And knowing how much some publicity costs, it’s can be a lot of money.
          I am constantly surprised at the number of people who don’t read a contract, or, as in the business I was in, have the contact read to them (and we ask them to initial each page and certain clauses) and they still deny understanding.
          Yes, some people are just dumb but some think that it applies to “other people”, and they are not other people.
          I have zero sympathy.
          Now let’s talk about Meaghan and Harry.

          • I feel sorry for Meaghan, I really do.

            Her family of in-laws and step-siblings are just a bunch of money-grubbing, abusive, dysfunctional a-holes who look at her as free money. I can completely understand why she wants nothing to do with any of them anymore.

            But she married into the Windsors, and that’s not exactly a step up.

            I can’t help the thought that if Harry wasn’t a prince, she and he would probably be perfectly happy somewhere.

            I do wonder about the alleged rifts between Will and Harry, though.

          • Loved the article by Amanda Vanstone in the SMH a couple of weeks ago, where she questioned our obsession with “minor’ royals, considering H is only 6th in line, and M nothing. Vanstone states that as someone in favour of a republic, she still has tremendous respect for the Queen, as a woman who has fulfilled a very difficult role with great class and dedication, but has little time for the others, until they prove themselves worthy. H & M are really no more relevant to Aus than the Duchess of Wessex (for example), but the tabloids are sucked in by weddings, babies, ex-actresses, and of course the lingering doubt about H’s ancestry.

          • I understand these are real human beings and their lives are probably difficult, even despite their wealth and privilege, but gosh, it makes for interesting reading, doesn’t it?

        • Surely Seven will launch an appeal in a bid to stop the floodgates opening. Has anyone watched Meghan’s show Suits? I hung in for a few seasons but really only season one was good. She was an ok actress in it but really it was a show where every woman on the cast was a size 6 and looked a certain way

          • I enjoyed Suits but I only have a vague memory of Meaghan. She was a bit part.
            I am sure she is fond of Harry but marrying him would have been a strategic career move. My Dad used to say “is as easy to love a rich man as a poor man”. Sadly, I didn’t listen.

          • On strong recommendation from a friend we tried Suits but couldn’t get past a couple of episodes.

  5. Since Harry is now so far down the line of accession to the throne, I would like to see him and Meghan fade into the background, mediawise, like Princess Anne and Prince Edward seem to have done.

    • I think you malign Princess Anne. She Is down on record as the hardest working royal over a number of years – and Prince Edwards gives it a red-hot shake as well. They more than earn their salaries.
      Both Harry and Meaghan could take a lesson or two from some of the other royals. And if they don’t like it, they can always resign from the job saving the English taxpayer a bucket load of money.
      I notice there is no suggestion of either of them getting real jobs with real salaries, and, before it is mentioned elsewhere, this is a process that has very successfully been followed by a number of others in the line of succession.
      The moment that William had the three children, Harry was no longer required and he could have followed another path. Funny that he chose not to do so (that’s sarcasm btw).

    • Oh…disappointed about Jamie, not a fan. Love Laurence of course (total backflip on my first impressions – lol), haven’t heard of the other three. I do like the thought of a real tradie, as long as he really takes the judging of work quality seriously. From the tweet, I gather he must be attractive – I hope they don’t venture into the “women slobbering over a shirtless man” sexist type thing.

      Might go and google the newbies…

      • Michael Clarke’s wife – now I know why the name was vaguely familiar. Must say that google doesn’t present a good image – I prefer someone who is a bit less “socialite”. She will have to work hard to convince me of her renovation credentials. (Based not just on appearance, but also on information in articles)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *