Eij Mrs 5005

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research

Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing association
Research Article
ISSN 2229 3795
Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

Subramaniam. S1, Himanshu Tiwari2
1- Associate Professor, Datta Meghe Institute of Management Studies, Atrey Layout, Nagpur
2- Assistant Professor, Datta Meghe Institute of Management Studies, Atrey Layout, Nagpur
himanshu_t@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
With the manifestation of many new television channels, there has been an up increase in the
competition amongst each of these channels. Whether through transmission of reality shows,
religious pilgrimage broadcast or figuring out their position by telecasting array of
programmes for kids or women, each of these channels is relying profoundly on creativity
and out of the box philosophy.
Aim
To understand the awareness of reality shows, and to analyze the impact of reality show on
male and female audience. The other objective of the study is to identify the most viewed
channel as far as reality shows are concerned.
Methodology
A questionnaire has been prepared and it is sent through Google drive. The response received
from the questionnaire will be analyzed.
Hypothesis
There is a significant difference in awareness level about the reality shows among male and
female.
There is a significant difference in impact level of the reality shows among male and female.
Findings
The researcher is expecting more than 100 responses. The data will be analyzed with the help
of statistical tools. The interpretations will be submitted in the tabular form.
Managerial implications
The research will help the channel owners to understand the pulse of the common man and it
can be utilized by the channel managers to bring more and more reality shows.
Originality
This is an original version of impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability.

Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
66

Subramaniam. S, Himanshu Tiwari
Limitations
1. Many people dont watch reality shows
2. The response of the respondent may not be full proof.
Keywords: Impact, Common man, Reality shows, Sustain,
1.
Introduction
As the economic flood gates opened in India, a new age of entertainment insurgency is being
observed. The television continues to inundate our screens and lives alike. This has been an
overall impact of globalization and liberalization, which has maneuvered to the growth of so
many new channels in India. With the manifestation of many new television channels, there
has been an up increase in the competition amongst each of these channels. Whether through
transmission of reality shows, religious pilgrimage broadcast or figuring out their position by
telecasting array of programmes for kids or women, each of these channels is relying
profoundly on creativity and out of the box philosophy. Any fresh concept or a programme
dished out on a channel- if is successful , results in a mad rat race of other television
channels for showcasing similar programmes with slight modification. It is one of the ways
to boost their channel ratings and the end is always to outdo the other channels.
Indian reality shows are the latest buzzword for the television industry. Reality TV is the
latest mantra of television producers and channel executives. It is the technique to amplify
TRP ratings. Most of the television shows which are being telecast nowadays are reality
shows specializing in dancing, singing, and acting. So fierce is the competition in this
segment that every channel boasts of at least two to three reality shows. Some of them are
legally genetic from abroad, (frequently from the USA) or some are cheap copies of the
shows abroad. The Indian reality shows have also been consistently successful in offering an
ample range, from Talent Hunt Shows, to dance dramas, to acting --flicks, talk shows,
cookery shows, chat shows,....the reality hunt list is endless.
1.1 History of reality shows- western influence
Reality television programmes have been around since the first broadcast of Candid
Camera in the late 1940s, although it has not been until recently years that these types of
shows have gained immense popularity. The debut of Survivor in 2000 has been credited
with the commencement of reality programming in the current television landscape (Rowen,
2000). Most of reality television programming is geared to individuals less than twenty five
years of age (Frank, 2003). Frank suggests that younger viewers are drawn to these shows
because they depict characters and situations that are relevant to their everyday lives. Nabi et
al. (2003) felt that regular viewers watched because they found it entertaining and that it was
enjoyable to watch anothers life as it enhanced their own awareness about themselves.
Casually viewers watched because they were bored or because they enjoyed watching
anothers life.
1.2 History of reality shows- Indian scenario
In India, reality television came with the advent of Sa Re Ga Ma. As a result, the flood
gates unlocked and reality television has swamped our television screens and lives identical.
Nevertheless these shows are made for attention-grabbing viewing; they turn out to be dull
67

and impractical. It is apparent that the show has been scripted, even if loosely. If one channel
boasts of Jhalak Diklaja, a replica of the American dance reality show Dancing with the
Stars, then the other one has Nach Baliye to counteract its audience value.
Both the shows boast of television heavyweights, but at epoch, the soup dole out by these
shows becomes a concoction of soap operas, bad production values and precarious
mudslinging. Unlike its foreign contemporary where contestants master classic dance styles
like the rumba-samba, jive, ballroom etc, these shows make the contestants dance on ordinary
Hindi songs which make the show quite ordinary. Then there are the flashy talent shows,
typically singing or dancing, which make us every one, think that any new talent is valueless
unless it can be taken to the stage. The most horrible seems to be the inclusion of children to
these shows. Apart from the very evident labour of shooting these shows, the most disturbing
issue is the unearthliness of dance, crude choices of songs and impolite costumes for children
aged between 5 and 10.These shows (apart from becoming platforms for movies to be
publicized) also produce talent which very soon goes into anonymity.
There are other brands of reality shows quizzes. The Bournvita Quiz Contest remained
and will always remain, without doubt, the epitome of dignified, knowledgeable and
apolished format of fun and delight for children as well as adults. Derek O Brien will
everlastingly remain the expert host who set trends for future knowledge based game shows.
The lone contemporary who stands shoulder to shoulder with him is the ageless Siddhartha
Basu, whose Mastermind India produced geniuses par excellence from among us. In modern
times, Amitabh Bachchan brought himself out from oblivion along with respect for the
medium of television, in the incomparable show Kaun Banega Crorepati, an imitation
of the hit Who wants to be a Millionaire. Shah Rukh Khan hosted the same show with
desirable fervor and also brought out the desi version of Are You Smarter than a Fifth
Grader, however lacking success. In this regard, it is mandatory to mention, Neena Guptas
brilliant yet sarcastic take on The Weakest Link, which did not go well among the audience
due to the stinging corns by the hostess. The most recent entrant into this section is Salman
Khan with his new show Dus ka Dum.
MTV brought out two reality shows centered on todays youth. Roadies, especially
Roadies 5.0 along with Splitsvilla served as new versions of reality which got the youth
hooked on to their idiot boxes.
2.
Literature review
Reality television programming has been around since the first broadcast of Candid Camera
in the late 1940s. It has not been until recently that these types of shows have gained
immense popularity. The debut of Survivor in 2000 has been credited with beginning the
infiltration of reality programming in the current television landscape (Rowen, 2000).
Individuals are embracing this genre of television programming as a relatively permanent
fixture in television programming. In 2003 the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences
added "Best Reality Show" as an Emmy category (Rowen, 2000). This has led to the
development of many types of reality programming formats. While the research in this area is
relatively limited despite the recent surge in reality programming, in what follows I aim to
summarize previous research in this area.
The increase in reality programming is undoubtedly related to with the increasing number of
cable channels, which allows advertisers to reach niche markets (Hiebert and Gibbons, 2000).
68

The majority of reality television programming is geared towards the individuals under
twenty five years old (Frank, 2003). MTV has been presenting the Real World to this target
younger demographic for more than ten years. Frank (2003) suggests that younger viewers
are drawn to these shows because they depict characters and situations that are relevant to
their everyday lives. However, it was not until the debut of Survivor in the year 2000 (Rowen,
2000), that reality television has gained a spot on network primetime television, where the
reality genre shows began to target an older demographic (Rowen, 2000). There is a variety
of shows that still target the younger demographic, but now there are more shows that target a
much wider demographic. For example, network primetime shows such as The Apprentice
target the 1849 demographic (Rowen, 2000). Therefore, it is most likely that a greater range
of individuals are watching reality television today than in the past.
Nabi et al. (2003) examined the genre of reality television programming itself.
Multidimensional space analysis, of all television shows, indicates that reality television is a
genre that is distinct from all of the other preexisting genres; However, not all reality shows
should be considered one cohesive genre (Nabi et al., 2003). Two dimensions were found in
the analysis, with the first one presented as a continuum as to how suited the programs are for
primetime programming. The second dimension is fiction real. This is a continuum based on
whether the programs were portrayed as fictional or realistic based shows. Some "reality"
shows were listed as fictional because for some reason, the audience did not perceive the
show as realistic (Nabi et al., 2003). Interestingly, not all reality shows were classified as
"reality," and not all fictional shows were classified as fictional. Some individuals included
shows that were not necessarily reality based in their definition of reality programming
because they perceived the shows as unrealistic (e.g., soap operas). Therefore, when studying
reality television it is important to examine the subcategories within this genre. They include:
romantic, talent, quiz, and game (Bailey and Barbato, 2003). In this study, I will examine not
only reality television viewing as a whole, but also exposure to subgenres of reality television.
Nabi (2007) used multidimensional scaling to understand the subgroups of reality TV
programming. There were two dimensions along which viewers thought about reality TV,
romance and competitiveness. Dating programs were found to be a unique type of
programming that did not relate to other types. Subgroups of reality programming were found
to be fluid and difficult for viewers to separate one from another because of the overlap
among the categories. Nabi encourages reality TV researchers to focus on the qualities of the
programs and not the categories.
Some research has sought to discover why people watch reality television. Reiss and Wiltz
(2004) asked individuals to rate themselves on Reiss's 16 basic life motives and also to report
how much they viewed reality programs and how much they enjoyed these shows. Results
indicated that the appeal to reality television programs was dependent on the amount of
reality television watched. The more reality programs an individual reported liking, the more
status oriented they were, they placed a higher value on vengeance, were more motivated by
social life, less motivated by honor, more focused on order, and more concerned with
romance. The reality television shows that people prefer to watch are those that stimulate the
motives people intrinsically value the most. For example, if they value romantic relationships,
they may prefer to watch The Bachelor, of if they value work, they may prefer to watch The
Apprentice. Therefore, when determining why people watch reality television, it can be
concluded that they select shows based on their individual values, motives, and desires.

69

Nabi et al.'s (2003) second study also examined the psychology of the appeal of reality
television programming. The hypothesis that individuals enjoy reality television
programming for voyeuristic reasons was not fully supported. Individuals indicated that they
enjoyed watching other people, but that they were fully aware that the individuals knew they
were being watched, which by definition is not voyeuristic. Therefore, Nabi et al. (2003)
concluded that people watch reality shows because they enjoy watching real people instead of
actors. Further examining the uses and gratifications sought by reality Television audiences,
Nabi et al. (2003) found that regular viewers watched because they found it entertaining, for
the enjoyment of watching another's life and the self awareness they receive from these
programs. Casual viewers watched because they were bored, or because they enjoyed
watching another's life.
Cognitive and emotional predictors of reality TV were examined by Nabi, Stitt, Halford, and
Finnerty (2006). Happiness, parasocial relationships, social comparison, self awareness,
negative outcome, and dramatic challenge were related to enjoyment of reality TV. They also
found that reality TV appealed less than other genres of TV programming to the audience.
This was not because of the negative emotions that it provoked, but the limited ability to
evoke positive emotions. Nabi et al. (2006) also determined that perceived reality was not
related to enjoyment from viewing reality TV programming. They found that various
dimensions of perceived reality were related, but not as a whole. Further research needs to be
conducted to understand the relationship between enjoyment and reality TV viewing.
Hall (2006) conducted focus groups to understand why participants enjoy watching reality
TV programming. Participants enjoyed reality shows most because of their humor and
suspense. Reality programs were also found to found to fulfill social functions for the viewers.
Respondents reported watching with friends and talking with friends about the reality shows
they watched. Participants indicated that their view of reality TV programming as realistic
was fluid. The criteria were different from show to show and changed as new shows were
broadcast. Therefore, perceived reality may be a difficult concept to measure.
Papacharissi and Mendelson (2007) examine the gratifications sought from reality TV.
Concurrent with previous research, findings indicate that respondents reported watching
reality TV mainly to pass the time or for entertainment purposes. The respondents who
reported watching for entertainment were most likely to perceive the shows as realistic.
Barton (2006) examined reality TV programming and gratifications obtained. Results
indicated that the content of the reality show influenced the gratifications obtained. A new
gratification that has not been studied was identified in this study, personal utility. This was
one of the strongest predictors of overall gratifications obtained. Personal utility refers to the
viewer gaining something personally useful from the program. This research provides support
for viewers genre specific programming selection is related to the gratifications obtained.
Therefore it is important to understand that the viewers are watching for different reasons.
These reasons may lead to differing perception by viewers and thus differing effects.
Therefore, the plan is to understand the motives and gratifications sought by reality television
viewers by including the television viewing motives scale (Greenberg, 1974). Individual
difference variables have also been found to moderate why people watch reality television. In
examining the gratifications received from reality television programming, Nabi et al. (2003)
found significant sex differences. Men reported to be more entertained by reality programs
and formed parasocial relationships more often than women. However, when examining how
the sex of the respondent moderates the effects of reality television programming, Reiss and
Wiltz (2004), did not find sex had a significant influence on reality television outcomes. Age
70

has also been found a significant influence on reality television outcomes. Younger viewers
reported becoming more self aware and entertained from watching reality shows, while older
viewers reported engaging in social comparisons from viewing (Nabi et al., 2003). Race also
had an impact on media use outcomes. Whites were found to identify with the characters,
while nonwhites were found to learn more information from reality television programming
(Nabi et al., 2003). Therefore, I plan to include sex, age, and race as individual difference
variables to examine if they moderate the relationship between reality television and
interpersonal relationship perceptions.
Perceived reality is a construct that has been important to media researchers, even before the
development of reality television. Potters (1988) conceptual definition of perceived reality is
a construct composed of three dimensions. The first dimension is the magic window, which is
defined as the belief in the literal reality of television messages (p.31). This component
deals with how much the viewer believes that the mediated message reflects the outside
world. Second, utility is defined as the practicality of the viewer applying what is viewed on
television in their everyday life. It refers to the relevance and degree to which one can relate
the information with their life. Third, identity refers to the identification with a character on
television, defined as the degree to which the viewer thinks a character plays a part in the
viewers actual life (Potter, 1988).
Magic window, utility, and identity are central to the understanding of a viewers perception
of reality because each of these components will affect a viewer's perceived reality of a
television program. Certain shows may create different levels of perceived reality. Each of
the three components of perceived reality differs by genre, and even show. These components
should be analyzed as to how they affect perceived reality of reality programming. I expect
that perceived reality may moderate the relationship between reality television and
interpersonal relationship perceptions. Studying crime reality television programming, such
as America's Most Wanted, Cavender and Bond Maupin (1993) examined perceived reality.
Based on the choice of story selection, cinematographic techniques, and the claims they make,
these programs were found to depict a very real sense of danger to the audience. Crime drama
was found to be high in the identity component (Cavender and Bond Maupin, 1993). The
images in these shows allow the viewer to identify with the characters that were presented as
victims. The victims were said to possess characteristics that included more people than they
excluded. Participating in reality programs means the audience is part of that reality, making
the reality almost indistinguishable from any other aspects of life, (Cavender and Bond
Maupin, 1993). This study suggests that reality programming has a unique form because of
the presentation of realistic characters, settings, and plot.
One study examined the perceived reality of reality TV programs. Meng and Lugalambi
(2003) found that respondents did not view reality programs as realistic. Perceived
plausibility of the program mediated the relationship between the type of program viewed
and the perceived utility. The authors argue that the best manner to examine perceived reality
is by the degree of personal utility that the viewer receives from the reality program. Because
reality television is a format of programming that is relatively new, there is limited research
regarding this genre of television programming. However, the research that exists in this area
tells us some important things to guide in the study of this phenomenon. First, reality
television lumped together under one umbrella may distort the effects of each subgenre
within reality programming. Second, researchers must take into account the level of
commitment of the viewer. Regular viewers have been found to have differing effects than
casual viewers (Reiss and Witlz, 2004). Lastly, researchers must understand that individuals
71

watch for different reasons, are motivated by different needs, and thus have different needs
satisfied through the watching of this genre of television.
Hall A. (2009) investigated whether viewer perceptions of reality programs' authenticity were
associated with involvement, enjoyment, and perceived learning. Four dimensions of
perceived authenticity were identified: cast eccentricity, representativeness, candidness, and
producer manipulation. Perceptions that the cast was not eccentric, that they were
representative of people the respondents could meet, that they were behaving candidly, and
that the producers were manipulating the show were associated with cognitive involvement.
Cast representativeness was also positively associated with social involvement. Each form of
involvement was associated with enjoyment. Perceptions of the cast members'
representativeness, candidness, and lack of eccentricity were associated with perceived
learning.
Lundy et. al. (2008) conducted a research study to explore college students' consumption
patterns in regard to reality television, their rationale for watching reality shows, their
perceptions of the situations portrayed on these shows, and the role of social affiliation in the
students' consumption of reality television. The results of focus groups indicated that while
participants perceive a social stigma associated with watching reality television, they
continue to watch because of the perceived escapism and social affiliation provided. Meti V.
and Jange S. (2012) made attempt to explore opinion of the students, research scholars, house
maker and teaching faculty's consumption patterns in regard to reality television, their
rationale for watching reality shows, their perceptions of the situations portrayed on these
shows, and its impact on the society based on the sample of 100 respondents in Gulbarga city
of Karnataka state. The results discussed are on types of television programmes viewed,
rating of most watched reality shows and its impact on society.
When Harshwardhan Nawathe became the first millionaire on the Indian television (in the
first season of KBC), an entire nation erupted in joy. The alluring taste of money and fame
made TV studios the new destination for changing people's journey in life. 'Small' suddenly
became big. Today mega stars like Amitabh Bachchan, Shah Rukh Khan, Salman
Khan,Akshay Kumar and Priyanka Chopra are all there on the small screen as reality show
hosts. You name it and you will have a reality show trying to grab your attention. From
rustling up meals in the kitchen, sharing bedroom secrets, spying on your companion, giving
a tough time to your old flame to choosing your life-partner on the television, everything is
there. From Sach ka Samna, Gang Next, Lovenet, Chair, Dare to date, Axe your ex, Iss
Jungle se Mujhe Bachao, Rahul dulhaniya le jayega to Rakhi Ka Insaaf, the gamut is just
unbelievable. (Nov 23, 2010 Times of India)
While shows like Saath Nibhana Saathiya, Diya Aur Baati Hum, Uttaran, Balika Vadhu, CID,
Pavitra Rishta et al have been consistently doing well in terms of popularity charts, reality
shows like Sach Ka Saamna... Phir Se Hoga, Mover And Shakers-2 have not been able to
make it to the top 10 cut. If last year's reality shows are to be considered, barring Panchkoti
Mahamoney Kaun Banega Crorepati, no other show managed to retain the momentum in
terms of TVRs. Even a show like Bigg Boss Season 5 which had the star presence of Salman
Khan teaming up with Sanjay Dutt, except for the first episode which got a TVR of 4.25, did
not climb up to the top 10 programs subsequently. While KBC 5 rode high with the towering
brand presence of Amitabh Bachchan. (April 10, 2012 Times of India).

72

2.1 Aim
1. To understand the awareness of reality shows among genders.
2. To evaluate the impact of reality shows on the society.
3. To identify the channel in which the reality shows are viewed the most.
2.2 Research methodology
Data has been collected through two sources: 1. Primary Source
2. Secondary Source
2.2.1 Primary data
Primary Data has been collected by the method of survey. Questionnaire was made and filled
online by the respondents. The questionnaire was prepared to understand the awareness and
impact of reality shows on common man.
2.2.2 Secondary data
Secondary Data has been collected from Internet, Books, and Journals.
2.2.2 1 Research plan
The plan designed to achieve the objective of the research was as follows
1. Area of Research The area of research is in and around Nagpur region.
2. Phase I The Questionnaire was prepared for the research which was based on the
various questions related to viewers of TV, awareness of reality shows, gender, and
age group, channels the respondent watches, etc.
3. Phase II In this phase, the questionnaire was filled by the respondents.
3.
Hypothesis
1. Null Hypothesis - There is a significant difference in awareness level about the
reality shows among male and female.
2. Null Hypothesis - There is a significant difference in impact level of the
reality shows among male and female.
3.1 Significance of the study

Media content analysis is an integral part of media studies and research that heighten media
users or citizens understanding of the society. Media programmes particularly telecast
shows, are bound to have positive or negative impact on society. Television is arguably the
most pervasive mass medium because it combines sound and pictures and no skills are
necessary for the audience to watch or enjoy them. Today, reality shows with celebrities acts
as a clutter-breaking property for viewers; they provide increased visibility and a chance to
reach out to a larger TV-viewing audience. Even though the star quotient is important as it
73

attracts viewers instantly, reality shows keep viewers glued to TV monitor even when the
presence of stars is less relevant. Thus it is of great importance that the impact of reality
shows on society is assessed.
3.2 Findings and data analysis
Table 1: Gender
Frequency
Valid
Male
Female
Total
Percent
55
47
102
Valid Percent
53.9
46.1
100.0
53.9
46.1
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
53.9
100.0
From the above table it can be concluded that the percentage of male respondents is 53.9% as
compared to the females which is 46.1%.
Table 2: TV Channels
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
Colors
Sony
SAB
Zee Tv
Star Plus
Total
System
Percent
47
20
8
4
2
81
21
102
Valid Percent
46.1
19.6
7.8
3.9
2.0
79.4
20.6
100.0
58.0
24.7
9.9
4.9
2.5
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
58.0
82.7
92.6
97.5
100.0
Table 3: Anova: single factor

SUMMARY
Groups
Count
Sum
Gender
Aware
102
102
149
121
Average
1.460784
1.186275
Variance
0.250922
0.153077
ANOVA
Source of
Variation
SS
df
MS
Between Groups
Within Groups
3.843137255
40.80392157
P-value
F crit
2.06E1 3.843137 19.02547
05 3.887906
202
0.202
Total
44.64705882
203
From the above table it can be concluded that 58% of the respondents watch reality shows on
the colors channel. On the other hand, the lowest viewership of reality show as per the
74

responses is of Star Plus channel. It is equally important to note that 20.6% respondents are
not viewer of the reality shows on any channel. From the above table it can be concluded that
the calculated value is more than the critical value, hence null hypothesis is rejected.
Therefore, there is not significance difference in awareness level of reality show as far as
male and female respondents are concerned.
Table 4: Gender * Reality show awareness * Impact of reality show cross tabulation
Count
Impact of Reality Show
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Gender
Male
Female
Total
Gender
Total
Female
Gender
Male
Female
Reality Show Awareness

Yes
No
4
10
1
8
5
18
3
3
7
0
7
1
14
1
28
23
51
6
4
10
45
10
38
9
83
19
Total
Male
Female
Gender
Agree
Total
Strongly Agree
Male
Female
Gender
Total
Male
Female
Gender
Total
Total
Total
14
9
23
3
3
7
8
15
28
23
51
6
4
10
55
47
102
Table 5: Descriptive Statistics

Mean
3.711111
3.684211
S.D
1.014043
0.873182
S.E.
0.151165
0.141649
LCV
2.697671
2.716702
UCV
3.302329
3.283298
The mean is not falling between the lower curve value and upper curve value, hence there is
not significance difference in impact level of reality show as far as male and female
respondents are concerned. The difference in standard error is also insignificant.
4.
Managerial implications
As a researcher it is imperative to stretch upon how the research will be useful to working
managers and future managers.

75

1. It is a very important matter that has come up relating to the viewers of reality shows
amongst respondents. The male female viewership is same hence reality shows can be
telecasted at any time.
2. As managers operating channels like Colors and Sony Entertainment Television the
awareness and impact of reality shows gives a positive indication resulting into
extended viewership in future.
3. Innovation and entertainment value will help the channels for longer sustainability of
reality shows and in this the operating managers are going to play a major role.
4. The cost and money involved in reality shows should be managed systematically.
Many shows during the progress realize they have invested more than the returns they
are expecting.
5. Another factor that is quite common among all managers they propose many things
during promotional campaign of reality shows but when actually it is shown it falls
below the expectation.
4.1 How reality shows will sustain in the minds of television viewers?
The reality shows can sustain if following things are done
1.
Innovativeness with entertainment value in the reality shows
2.
It should be closer to real life of viewers
3.
The viewership should cover all age groups.
4.
The vulgarity and bad language should be avoided if reality shows wants to
sustain.
5.
Lastly, the Indian flavour should be maintained to be successful in Indian

Television channels.
5. Conclusion
1. The reality shows are watched by both male and female viewers.
2. As far as the impact of reality shows is concerned, it is concluded that these
shows make an impact on respondents.
3. The reality shows creates entertainment value and the respondent feel relaxed
after watching these shows
4. It is also concluded that most of the respondents watches reality shows on
colors channel.
6. References
1. Bailey, F. and Barbato, R., (2003), The reality of reality shows [television broadcast]
New York: Bravo Company.

76

2. Barton, K.M., (2006), Reality television programming and diverging gratifications:

The influence of content on gratifications obtained. Paper presented at the annual
conference for the National communication association.
3. Cavender, G. and Bond Maupin, L., (1993), Fear and loathing on reality television:
An analysis of "America's Most Wanted" and "Unsolved Mysteries." Sociological
inquiry, 63, p 305317.
4. Clark, S. and Nabi, R., (2007), Television consumption and young womens
expectations of sexual timing. Paper presented at the International communication
association annual meeting.
5. Debashish Sengupta Dr., (2009), Reality shows: - The new marketing tool, Indian Journal of
marketing, XXX II( 1).
6. Deepika Sahu and Amrita Mulchandani., (2010), Addiction called reality shows,
Times of India
7. Frank, B., (2003), Check out why young viewers like reality programming.
Broadcasting and cable, 133, p 18.
8. Greenberg, B.S., (1974), Gratifications of television viewing and their correlates for
British children. In J.G. Blumler and E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass
communication: current perspectives on gratifications research, p 7192, Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.
9. Hall, A., (2006), Viewers perceptions of reality programs. Communication Quarterly,
54, p 191211.
10. Hall A., (2009), Perceptions of the Authenticity of Reality Programs and Their
Relationships to Audience involvement, Enjoyment, and perceived learning. Journal
of broadcasting and electronic media, 53(4), pp 515-531.
11. Hiebert, R.E. and Gibbons, S.J., (2000), Exploring mass media for a changing world.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum associates, Publishers.
12. Kristin L. Cherry., (2008), A dissertation on reality TV and interpersonal relationship
perception.
13. Lundy, L. K., Ruth, A. M., and Park, T. D., (2008), Simply irresistible: Reality TV
consumption patterns. Communication quarterly, 56(2), p 208225.
14. Meng, B. and Luglambi., (2003), The perceived reality of reality based TV programs.
Paper presented at the International communication association annual meeting in San
Diego, CA.
15. Meti V. and Jange S., (2012), Impact of reality shows on society---A study in
Gulbarga City. Research in media studies.
16. Michal R S Solomon., (2005), Marketing real people, Real choice 3rd edition, Elnoora W Stwral
republishing.
77

17. Nabi, R.L., (2007), Determining dimensions of reality: A concept mapping of the
reality TV landscape. Journal of broadcasting and electronic media, 51, pp 371-390.
18. Nabi, R.L., Biely, E.N., Morgan, S.J., and Stitt, C.R., (2003), Reality based television
programming and the psychology of its appeal. Media Psychology, 5, pp 303-330.
19. Nabi, R.L., Stitt, C.R., Halford, J., and Finnerty, K.L., (2006), Emotional and
cognitive predictors of the enjoyment of reality based and fictional television
programming: An elaboration of the uses and gratifications perspective. Media
psychology, 8, pp 421-447.
20. Navya Malini., (2012), TV soaps pips Reality shows Times of India
21. Papacharissi, Z. and Mendelson, A.L., (2007), An exploratory study of reality appeal:
Uses and gratifications of reality TV shows. Journal of broadcasting and electronic
media, 51, pp 355-370.
22. Potter, W. J., (1988), Perceived reality in television effects research. Journal of
broadcasting and electronic media, 32, pp 23-41.
23. Reiss, S. and Wiltz, J., (2004), Why people watch reality TV. Media psychology, 6, p
363378.
24. Rowen, B., (2000), History of reality TV. Retrieved January 2, 2005, from
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/realitytv1.html.
25. Zakirhusen Patel and Mihir Soni., (2013), Perception and preferences of people
regarding reality shows A study of Navsari city of Gujarat Indian stream of
journal, 3, Issue II.

78

Eij Mrs 5005

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eij Mrs 5005

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research

ISSN 2229 3795

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

3.1 Significance of the study

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

Table 3: Anova: single factor

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

Reality Show Awareness

Table 5: Descriptive Statistics

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

Innovativeness with entertainment value in the reality shows

It should be closer to real life of viewers

The viewership should cover all age groups.

Lastly, the Indian flavour should be maintained to be successful in Indian

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

2. Barton, K.M., (2006), Reality television programming and diverging gratifications:

Impact of reality shows on common man and its sustainability

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

You might also like