Professional Practice and Ethics

Critically discuss the different ethical issues that producers of reality TV need to consider when presenting the attitudes and behavior of real people as entertainment for the viewing public using the Potter Box model to highlight ethical concerns.

Case Study: Big Brother UK (2008)

Ethics is a philosophy that centers on correct conduct and good works towards fellow men. It can be traced as far back as the Greek philosopher Socrates who encouraged his fellow man to look past their concerns of things material and to concentrate on the condition of man. Known as the Socratic method or method of '"elenchus," Socrates gave a way of discussing moral concepts through a line of questioning that pertained to humanity such as Justice and Goodness. (Vlastos, 1983; 27-58).

This concern for the well being of man is evident in our everyday lives and more so when issues of morality and decency are discussed in the media. The advent of reality shows such as Survivor in the 90s has tapped into a human condition that would have seemed abhorrent mere decades ago: voyeurism. We seem more preoccupied with what the actors and actresses do in real life than the people they play on screen sometimes and why not? It is always more entertaining to see the multi-faceted and intricate lives of people in their triumphs and more so their falls. Reality television satisfies that urge to peep and though it has garnered millions of dollars of revenue though advertising, product placement and the like there are many ethical issues which have yet to be addressed. As Hill (2005; 108) has said; “the ethics of reality TV is significant to our understanding of the production, content and reception of genre as a whole.” After all these are not animals performing in a caged box we call television for the lewd enjoyment of viewers. These are people too.

I will use a case study of the UK version of Big Brother and, by highlighting certain events, apply the Potter box model, highlight the ethical concerns of presenting the attitudes and behavior of real people as entertainment for the viewing public.

The first part is the definition and the facts. In this part we look at the facts of the Big Brother show without making any judgments. We understand that this is a reality show where people from different backgrounds, sexuality, race, creed and gender are kept in an enclosed area for a length of time. We acknowledge that the producers of the show determine the choice of housemates and they are different in order to give an impression of diversity to the public. We also know that they have gone through an extensive selection process (being interviewed more than twice) before entering the Big Brother compound which means that they are there of their own free will and that they have been informed about the situation they will be in.

An ethical problem here is the amount of preparation and sufficient information given to the participants by the producers. Since the show is mostly constructed (by the producers who determine the 40 minutes viewers get to watch out of a whole day), viewers get to only see the glamorous side of being in Big Brother and may not be fully aware of the consequences to being held in a small space for an extended amount of time. A good example is when Lisa snapped and broke the handle of the fire door on day 58 and walked out. She reached as far as the security office before being escorted back into the house willingly. She later said that leaving the house felt good because she needed the feeling of freedom.

We realize that the participants have no privacy and are perpetually monitored. There are cameras all around the house, including the toilets, and that they have to wear microphones at all times. The camera in the toilet poses a significant ethical issue as participants who wish to use them will need their privacy to do so and the producers have to be quick to turn off the cameras while they do their business and to turn it back on if housemates wish to use it for other purposes (for example, gossiping).

Since the housemates are kept in an enclosed area the events (like tasks) that happen in the house are constructed, which means that these things do not usually take place in normative society. These tasks usually come with different cultural themes (for example Chinese, Roman, Japanese) and the producers should be aware of not offending minority cultures that watch the show by stereotyping (for example Japanese Geisha outfits during the marathon karaoke session might imply that only the Japanese like to karaoke).

The second part of the Potter box is values. Here we state and compare the merits of different values to acknowledge influences on decision-making. By referring to the specific concerns of the individuals involved, it allows us to indentify differences in perspectives. We first judge it according to Aesthetic Values. The majority of the participants in the house are pleasing to the eye. Most of them have fit bodies and are seen constantly exercising in the house while others (especially the females) are thin. These fit the mold of the “perfect” body which makes viewers want to keep watching. The producers also have to consider that minorities might be watching the show and therefore they introduce a small amount of housemates that closely represent them. For example Kathreya would represent Asians while Dennis represents the gay community. This is also perilous as they might be interpreted as stereotyping so producers would give the housemates tasks which encourage teamwork and thereby a perception of harmonious living between everyone is created.

The next value judged is Professional Values. We judge the way the show is created and the structure in which they adhere to. Such things like the rules, regulations and conduct book that the housemates have to follow in order to ensure their safety. Examples of these rules are no intimidating behavior towards another housemate and no vandalizing of the Big Brother house. Producers also have to have a more in depth version of the rules to cater to any situations that might arise from the house such as bullying by Alexandra. Besides the rules producers should have a list of protocols that address different the situations that will happen in the house. These include the protection of housemates who have committed serious offences from the public when they are evicted (like in Alexandra’s and Dennis’s case).

The next values we look at are Logical Values. These are judged on the consistent efforts and competence of the producers. There have been nine seasons of Big Brother in the UK and we should expect the evolution and modification of rules in subsequent seasons that reflect on previous Big Brother incidents as well as catering to the particular culture here. An example is 2007s Celebrity Big Brother racism and bullying incident which might lead producers to having a firmer stand on bullying in future seasons.

Moral Values are the grey area when it comes to reality shows. Besides the no intimidation or abuse (physically or emotionally) policy everything else seems to be allowed, in fact sometimes encouraged. Gossiping, lying, stealing is seen as acceptable behavior in the house. An example would be Sylvia who was seen constantly gossiping with her clique and stashing away food she stole. Unfortunately this kind of behavior is what makes it exciting to watch Big Brother and therefore is seen as no ethical consequence to the producers.

The next part of the Potter box model is principals. Here ethical philosophies or modes of ethical reasoning that may be applicable to the situation are used to understand the situation. The philosophy I will use is Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative (1785, 2002), which derives from the concept of duty; that the ends never justify the means.

The artificially constructed world in the Big Brother house is govern by the aforementioned rules, regulations and conduct. Like in the real world which is run by laws, housemates are bound by these rules. As such the producers should always be strict in enforcing the laws of the house. Clear-cut cases such as Alexandra’s bullying and Dennis spitting on Mohamed should be dealt with quickly and by the book. There are certain ethical issues however that concerns what constitutes as bullying. When Rex smudged Jennifer’s portrait of Stuart on day 23 it could have been perceived as malicious intent towards her. Producers could have addressed the situation quickly by calling the both of them into the Dairy Room to discuss but instead the situation was made worse when everyone got involved, escalating the problem which eventually led to the premature eviction of Dennis.

Another philosophy that would address ethical concerns is John Rawl’s Veil of Ignorance (1971, 2005), which asks producers to place themselves in the position of the people. By putting themselves in the housemates’ shoes they empathize with them which leads to a better understanding of the situations thereby procuring a quicker response to the situation. As exampled above the situation of Jennifer’s portrait could have been quelled faster should the producers reacted immediately.

The fourth part of the Potter box model is loyalties. Producers should take into account the groups of people who are affected by Big Brother and ask who their allegiances lie with. These groups are all connected to each other; the participants, the advertisers, the public, the network station, the communications regulator. The group that would have the most impact on the show would be the public as proven with the Alexandra bullying case. Over 350 complaints were made to UK communications regulator Ofcom (Office of Communications) by viewers after Channel 4 broadcast an episode in which housemate Alexandra yelled abuse at a number of her fellow contestants (Brand Republic, Internet). Channel 4 itself received numerous complaints as well. This prompted the producers of the show to repeatedly warn Alexandra about her conduct in the Big Brother House. Producers would also take into consideration the network station’s (Channel 4) image by considering implications that they were lenient to Alexandra’s behavior. The producers would have then called Alexandra to the Dairy Room and remind her of the list of rules and regulations pertaining to the conduct in the Big Brother house. This not only informs the housemate but informs the viewers of the show that the network station has protocol when dealing with all sorts of issues as well, ensuring them that Channel 4 is well prepared and organized. Another point to note is that producers would also ask Channel 4 for a later time slot in their line of programming after the watershed to allow cussing and certain scenes of nudity (for example Rebecca’s breast flashing).

Because of such incidents that arouse public anger producers should also take into account the volatility of the advertisers of the show especially its main sponsor Virgin Mobile. The people who were outraged by Alexandra’s behavior would not only question why Channel 4 would allow such bullying to take place but also associate its sponsors who might be perceived to condone the network’s station choices in regards to handling the situation.

The next allegiances would involve the participants in Big Brother. Alexandra’s attitude towards fellow housemates was intimidating and her outbursts at almost everyone were tantamount to bullying. The producers of the show had the ethical consideration to ensure that no housemate would be hurt, emotionally or physically by Alexandra’s abuse, repeatedly warning her in the Dairy Room. The climax of the bullying was on Day 13 when Alexandra, talking to Darnell, made highly intimidatory remarks regarding seeking payback for offenses committed in the house using gang jargon. This posed a serious threat to housemates and the producers removed her from the house the next day in order to prevent further aggravation. Other situations that posed ethical dilemmas were the broadcast of Mohamed’s rants in the Dairy Room to the whole house. Due to a “technical fault” Mohamed’s comments on his views of Alexandra were broadcasted to the whole house which meant that Alex could hear what he said. The Dairy Room is supposed to be a place where housemates could confide their experiences in Big Brother but because of the “glitch” Mohamed’s private views were heard and he would then be in danger of being nominated by the person he offended as well as not being able to trust his privacy being respected.

To conclude, the producers of Big Brother should consider the many ethical dilemmas posed in creating a reality television show such as this which deals with the physical and mental well being of its participants. Aside from its entertainment value the should realize that the housemates future will be hugely affected by their participation in the show and that the producers should be able to give full disclosure before allowing them to enter the Big Brother house.


References:
Brand Republic (2008) http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/816378/Pressure-C4-remove-bullying-Big-Brother-housemate/ (viewed 1st August 2008)

Hill, Annette (2005) Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television, Routledge

Kant, Immanuel (1785, 2002) Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Yale University Press

Rawls, John (2005) A Theory of Justice, Universal Law Publishing Co Ltd

Vlastos, Gregory (1983) ‘The Socratic Elenchus’, in Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 1: 27–58