Today's society is infatuated with the Glorification of the Self. We freely give up our own privacy in exchange for wanting other people to see how great we are. Social networking sites demonstrate how “popular” we are, while video sharing sites let the whole world see into our private lives.
Our hypothesis is that sites such as this would not have evolved if not for the glorification of self-made stars through “reality TV”. In turn, people would not want to be stars if not for the glorification of movie stars and their status as role models. We have always wanted to be just like the stars, and previously we could only do this by buying what they buy. Now we finally have the technology to allow us to act like the stars that we have always admired.
Themes – the ideas that flow through the entire paper
Social construction of reality (SCoR)
Image manipulation, with respect to stars and everyday people
Continuous need to prove our self-esteem
Movie stars as role models
The glamor of movie stars
How real are their public personas? How much is fabricated for the benefit of selling?
Homosexual sex symbols
Reality TV
Summary: This allows “regular people” to act like movie stars on TV; 15 min of fame
American Bandstand
Is this the first “reality TV”? Are there others?
Real World
Isn't this the beginning of what we call “reality TV”?
Girls Gone Wild
Normalization of being crazy without consequence
Jackass
People acting like idiots, just for exposure
The Simple Life
Paris Hilton as a role model
Summary
How real is reality TV really?
Editors decide characters' roles (ScoR), a la Real World
Scripts, a la Simple Life
Game shows / Talent shows / Popularity contests
Early shows
Gong show
Who Wants to be a Millionaire?
Prime-time game show for the next millennium
Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?
Spawned shows like The Bachelor; misrepresentation of Rockwell
Survivor
Archetype of team competition / voting people off / popularity
American Idol
Archetype of directly competing with one another / talent show
Having no talent as valuable as being talented: Hung
Web 2.0
Summary: This allows even more “regular people” to act like movie stars, through their presence online
hotornot
Upload your own image to prove you're hot and raise self-esteem
Upload others (bad) images to prove you're hotter than them
MySpace / Facebook
Demonstrate popularity through # of friends
Forming groups (esp Facebook groups) with others of like interests
Facebook feeds – always knowing what others are doing
Blogging
Demonstrate popularity through # of reads
Publicize details of your personal life through writing
Videoblogs tie in with youtube
youtube
Publicize details of your personal life through video
Serial TV shows
lonelygirl15
cheap video devices (cameras everywhere)
“Surreal” TV
Summary: Now trying to humanize and make more accessible people who were previously (or still are) our role models. Again, how real is this?
The Osbournes
See stars in their daily lives; The Newlyweds, etc.
The Apprentice
Really a talent show, but it shows famous people in their “real life”
Surreal Life
Washed up stars
Consequences (perhaps this should be mixed in with the rest of the paper?)
Loss of privacy
Can this be used by Big Brother?
As loss of privacy is normalized, are we then OK with more cameras everywhere?
Civil liberty concerns
Punishments of law-breaking by stars vs. normal people
What happens when we think we can act like these stars, and we break the rules?
Underage drinking / clubbing by the rich vs you & me
Pictures on myspace – job interviews, getting fired?
Impression management
Do we perceive people how they really are, or is it just a big hoax?
A large group of acquaintances rather then a small group of core friends
Does Myspace / facebook make us feel more connected than we actually are?
Some group of friends vs no friends at all
Loners, esp. high school, can form relationships easier
BUT are these relationships negative and self-reinforcing? See: Virginia Tech shooting