Major Project Report

On
IMPACT Of REALITY SHOWS On YOUTH
Submitted In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirement Of
Bachelor of Business Administration

Internal Guide

Submitted By:

Dr. Deepali Saluja

Vinayak Mishra

Assistant Professor

05850501712

Submitted To:
Banarsidas Chandiwala Institute of Professional Studies, Dwarka, New Delhi
(Affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University)

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project work done on IMPACT Of REALITY SHOWS On
YOUTH submitted to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi by Vinayak
Mishra in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of degree of Bachelor Of
Business Administration, is a bonafide work carried out by him under my supervision
and guidance. This work has not been submitted anywhere else for any other
degree/diploma. The original work was carried during 28 January, 2015 to 15 April, 2015.

Dr. Deepali Saluja

(Assistant Professor)

15th April 2015

Counter signed by-

Director

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been possible without the
kind support and help of many individuals and organizations. I would like to extend my
sincere thanks to all of them.
I am highly indebted to Dr. Deepali Saluja for their guidance and constant supervision as
well as for providing necessary information regarding the project & also for their support
in completing the project.
I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents & member of Banarsidas
Chandiwala Institute of Professional Studies for their kind co-operation and
encouragement which help me in completion of this project.

I would like to express my special gratitude and thanks to industry persons for giving me
such attention and time.

My thanks and appreciations also go to my colleague in developing the project and

people who have willingly helped me out with their abilities.

Vinayak Mishra
(05850501712)

Bonafide Certificate
This is to certify that as per best of my belief the project entitled IMPACT Of REALITY
SHOWS On YOUTH is the bonafide research work carried out by Vinayak Mishra
student of BBA, BCIPS, Dwarka, New Delhi during January-April 2015, in partial
fulfillment for the award of the degree of Bachelor of Business Administration.
She has worked under my guidance.

Name- Mrs. Deepali Saluja

Project Guide (Internal)
DATE-

TABLE OF CONTENTS
S NO

CONTENTS

1.

Executive Summary

2.

Introduction

3.

About the project

4.

Objective of the study

5.

Literature review

6.

Research Methodology

7.

Data Collection and Data Analysis

8.

Findings & Conclusions

9.

Suggestions

10.

Annexure

11.

Bibliography

PAGE NO

Executive summary
Reality shows is the new mantra of television producers and channel executives. It is the
means to increase TRP ratings and end is always to outdo the other channels and the
similar-but-tweaked-here-and-there shows churned out by the competition. So fierce is
the competition in this segment that every channel boasts of at least two or three reality
shows. Some of them are inherited legally from abroad, (mostly and always from the
USA the Godmother of Reality television) or some are cheap copies of shows from
abroad. If one channel of Jhalak Dikhlaja, a take on the American Dance reality show
Dancing with Stars, then another one has Nach Baliye to offset its audience value.
Both the shows boast of television heavyweights, but at times the soups served by these
shows becomes a concoction of show operas, bad production values and precarious
mudslinging. Unlike its foreign contemporary where contestants master classic dance
styles like the jive, rumba-samba, ballroom, etc., these shows makes the contestants
dance on ordinary Hindi songs which makes the show quite mundane. Then there are the
glitz talent shows, mostly singing and dancing, which makes us all feel that any other
talent is worthless unless it is taken to the stage. The worst seems to be the addition of
children to these shows. Apart from the obvious labor of shooting these shows, the most
disturbing issue is the unearthliness of dance, crude choice of song 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 Bourn vita Quiz Contest remained and
will always remain, for me without doubt, the epitome of dignified, knowledgeable and a
polished format for fun and delight for children and adults alike. Deric O Brien will
forever remain the consummate host who set trends for future knowledge.
Feature real people doing real things. Some can be hilarious, some can even make the
audience cry and some can make the audience go wild. Re4ality shows are very well
accepted all over the world. Thousands of reality shows are already been in a place called
the heart of the audiences, for example, Indian Idol, Comedy Nights with Kapil, KBC,
Big Boss, Roadies and many more. With the help of reality show a lot of talents have
been discovered and the demand in business such as in advertising is making a huge
improvement. However with this kind of program, a lot of things have been wasted and

the attitude of the contestants is changing to be worst as there is the lack of moral values.
Reality shows are the platform for the people to present their talents. It is the best
platform for the time being as reality shows are being watched by thousands of people in
front of the television. It is all about publicity. Good publicity will lead to great
popularity thus making the persons talent easily discovered. Not all the talents came
from a person from a rich family. Most of them just did not know how and where to show
their talent. All they can think about was finding and digging for money to earn a living.
With the new introduction of reality show the judges what they really have. This will
definitely increase their level of confidence. As the judges will never judge on how they
look like physically but the judges will search about how they express their true talent.
When they made it through and being recognized by the public, this will change their
living to better on.
In this research, the sample size of 100 samples was considered in order to conduct the
research. This research was conducted specifically on youth, age group consisting of
respondents aged between 18 years to 35 years. The questionnaire mode was selected for
collection of data and the data was interpreted through MS Excel. In MS Excel, charts
like Bar-Diagram, Pie-Chart, Histogram, and PIVOT table was used to present and
interpret the data. For filling of questionnaire the method of non-probabilistic
convenience sampling was used. The main objective of the study was to analyze how the
reality shows are influencing the people day to day lifestyle. This study lays emphasis on
their behavior towards the reality shows, considering both positive and negative aspects
were analyzed.

Introduction
Reality shows are the trump of producers of television industry. Common audience has
become bored watching the never ending melodramatic daily shows. From the urge of
something new the idea of reality shows sprang up.
Simultaneously, this emerged as a profitable platform for the serial makers and generated
good revenues for television industry and created a very good platform for thousands
who want to achieve great things in their field of interest. The popularity of Indian reality
shows lies in the fact that these are short termed yet these generate a perfect dose of
entertainment for the viewers. The characters that are part of Indian reality shows are
real.
As a result it becomes easy for the audiences to relate the participants. The stardom
associated with the reality shows is enough drawing attention of common mass. But there
are other shows also the idea of which is not praise worthy like Swambar.
The reality shows makes the most quotient of the viewers. However, not all the shows
have been equally successful. Some of the Indian reality shows achieved an unpredictable
success, otherwise rejected by the viewers despite being hosted by the celebrities.
Another reason for the popularity of these reality shows is that these are the only
alternative to the melodramatic daily shows.
Moreover there are more believable then the episodes of the daily shows which have
somehow reached saturation point. The Indian reality shows have been successful in
offering a wide variety. Reality shows are selling like hot cakes. All you have to do is
huddle up a handful a average people or small time starlets create a dramatic situation
and whoa, your reality show is ready to go on air! The best part about reality shows is
that they give quick fame and recognition even to the average people like you and me.
Besides, the viewer gets a kick out of all he emotional drama (which is scripted in most
cases) that happens on sets. There is really no death of reality show ideas but most
revolve around similar concepts. So In case you wish to air your own show someday,
then you may have to come up really good ideas for show. The presence of popular

celebrities has also contributed in raising interest of the common mass. Given below are
some interesting ideas for a reality show.

The Indian reality shows flourished itself in various fields such as singing, dancing,
comedy, quiz, modelling, hardcore stunts and many other talents. The exciting amount of
prize which has hardly been assumed by the common people marked difference in the
popularity of the Indian reality shows. The presence of popular celebrities has also
contributed in raising interest of the common mass.
The boom in the reality shows occurred light after the success story of Kaun Banega
Crorepati, anchored by Amitabh Bachchan. This show offered a maximum cash prize
of Rs.7 crore. The unprecedented success of the reality show opened up numerous
avenues for such shows on Indian television. The sponsors were ready to invest and to
put all there were to death of participants. While Kaun Banega Crorepati changed the
way people looked at the reality shows.
The rising popularity of the reality shows on television channels has added a new
dimension to the production of TV programs. These shows give opportunities to the
prodigies residing in the interiors of the country to showcase their talent. These shows
have not only changed the destiny of the many television channels but also of many
ordinary people. Celebrity reality shows are another aspect of reality television that has
become extremely popular with the audience.

About The Project

Media content analysis is an integral part of media studies and research that heighten
media users or citizen understanding the society. Media programmers particularly telecast
shows, are bound to have positive or negative on the society. Television is arguably the
most pervasive mass medium because it combines sound and pictures and no skills are
necessary audience to watch or enjoy them. Today, reality shows with celebrity acts as
clutter breaking property for viewers they provide increased visibility and a chance to
reach out a large TV viewing audience, even though the star quotient is important as it
attracts viewers instantly, reality shows viewers glued to TV monitors even when the star
presence is less relevant. Thus it is of great importance that the impact of reality shows on
society is assessed. A viewer of relevant related studies has yielded the following results:
Comedy Nights with Kapil - Colors
Comedy Nights with Kapil is an Indian sketch comedy show that premiered on Colors
TV on 22 June 2013. Many episodes feature celebrity guests who usually appear to
promote their latest films in a comedy-focused talk show format. The show became
India's highest rated scripted TV show. The Famous Phrase or slang Baba Ji Ka
Thullu is introduced by Kapil Sharma in this show which instantly become a sensation
and took the Country by storm. At CNN-IBN Indian of the Year awards, Sharma was
awarded the Entertainer of the Year award for 2013. It has attracted a large number of
viewers across the country and also fascinated many sports persons and celebrities. It has
achieved a platform of having maximum number of views at a time in countrywide.
Indias Got Talent Colors
Again an adaptation from foreign show got talent. The show has been adapted in more
than 35 countries and Indian version has seen 5 seasons from 2009 till 2014. This concept
of the show is different from and it does not concentrate on one aspects; the show has
been some brilliant solo dancers, singers, stuntmen, and even painters and sand artist.

During the semifinal and final rounds, viewers vote on which contestants will advance. It
is the first Got Talent format show in Asia, and India's first large-scale televised
entertainment variety show, intending to showcase India's best unknown acts and talents.
The show travels to different cities across India in search of interesting local talent. The
diversity of the show can also be gauged by its winners and prize money of Rs.50lacs and
a Maruti Suzuki Ritz. Its new season is going to start in 2015.
Indian Idol - Sony TV
This is the first reality show in India for solo singers. Only channel V has a similar show
(V popstars) but that has to find a band instead of singers. Indian Idol actually started the
trend of bringing foreign adapted version of show on the Indian television. Till date show
is famous and remains at the first place for youngsters to show their talent of singing on
television. The judging panel in all the season has been top class. It was started in 2004
and has performed 6 seasons till 2012.
Kaun Banrga Crorepati Sony TV
KBC was first reality show of India and so far remains the best reality show in India. The
reason for keeping it at the first place is because it give common people a chance to show
their knowledge and earn money. It feels really nice when people from all strata of
society are given an equal chance to earn money from their abilities rather than marrying
some unknown supposedly TV-star.
BIG BOSS Colors
This can easily be said as a most controversial show on Indian Television. The format of
the show is simple yet challenging. A bunch of celebrities closed in a house without the
comfort of watching TV, friends, family, not even a watch. But they are watched around
the clock with cameras all around the house. Some of the contestants like Bindu, Sameer,
Soni, Rajeev have revived their sinking careers by participating in BIG BOSS.
MTV Roadies MTV

The longest running reality show is on third position of my list. It has completed 8
seasons and season 9 on its way. This is on that one dont get bored of best episode are
the auditions. Raghu, Rajeev and Ranvijay just tear the contest apart. There are no fixed
standards as to the contestant; they are selected on their realness. I am no employee of
MTV and would like to point out the judges there want the real you. It has craved the
youngsters mind towards it and talks are there for it in country. Youngsters are so
addictive to take part in it and have changed their way to television. It is the most
watched show by young age and the coming generation.
Crime Patrol Sony TV
Crime

Patrol is

an Indian crime reality

television anthology

series created

by

Subramanian S. lyer for Sony Entertainment Television India and Sony Entertainment
Television Asia. The first season was created by Cinevistaas Limited, while later seasons
are created by Optimystix Entertainment. The location of the series is set in Mumbai,
India. The episodes of first and second seasons were halfhourly, while episodes of third
season were one hourly. The series was premiered on 9 May, 2003. The series is currently
running for its fourth season. The fourth season is titled as Crime Patrol Satark and is
hosted by Anoop Soni. This serial provides the watcher about the growing crime tactics
in this changing environment. It actually warns the society from new ways of crime,
growing capacity of criminal minded people and also allows them to understand the
upcoming generation.
Savdhaan India Life Ok
Savdhaan India - India Fights Back (English: Caution India! - India Fights Back) is a
Hindi-language crime show aired by Life OKthen STAR Utsav. This show is hosted
by Sushant

Singh, Gaurav

Chopra, Mohnish

Behl, Pooja

Gaur, Saurabh

Raj

Jain and Hiten Tejwani. It focuses on real-life crimes stories in India.

Initially the series ran on Star Plus. A rebooted version called "Savdhaan India - India
Fights Back" telecasted on Life OK on 23 July 2012. Versions of the program have also

aired as Savdhaan India - Mumbai Fights Back which was hosted by Atul Kulkarni
Savdhaan India - Crime Alert and Savdhaan India - U.P Fights Back.
MasterChef India Star Plus
MasterChef India initial rounds consist of a large number of contestants from across India
individually auditioning by presenting a dish before the three judges to gain one of 50
semi-final places.
The semi-finalists then compete in several challenges which test their food knowledge
and preparation skills. In Season 1 and 2, the top 50 competed until 12 were left, with the
final 12 progressing to the main stage of the show. The winner competes for a prize that
includes their own cookery show, the chance to have their own cookbook published,
and 1,00,00,00 in cash. Its motive is to promote the new ways of cooking style format
in India. As India being the land of variety of spices, people here group these to create
something new out of it. This show provides these new comers to outperform their
competitors and also to boost their talent of cooking. The judges for season 4 are
Chef Vikas Khanna, Chef Sanjeev Kapoor and Chef Ranveer Brar.
Nach Baliye Star Plus
Nach Baliye 5 started in 2012 and ended in March 2013 with winners Jay Bhanushali and
Mahii Vij. Karan Wahi and Gautam Rode hosted the program. For season 5, the judges
were Shilpa Shetty, Sajid Khan and Terrence Lewis. The show is a competition wherein
10 television celebrity couples compete against each other. Contestants dance to a
different tune, different theme and different styles every week and scores are given by the
judges. Each week one couple is eliminated based on public voting and their scores. Nach
Baliye ('Nach' means Dance and 'Baliye' means partner or mate) is a dance, realitytelevision series on the Indian channelStar Plus. The show is a dancing contest among
celebrity couples. The first and second season aired on Star One and then shifted to Star
Plus. Nach Baliye season 7 will have different with new judges. The judges are
Bollywood beauty Preity Zinta, writer Chetan Bhagatand choreographer Marzi Pestonji.
Ekta Kapoor might also join the list.

Objectives of Study

The main objective of the study is to identify the effects of various types of reality

2
3

shows on youth.
Study the changes adopted by the youth in their behavior.
The objective of this study is to investigate the impact that reality television
shows have towards the viewers, specifically to the youth between the age group

of 18 to 35.
To study main research question was To what extent do the reality TV shows
influence the youth in negative and positive manners?

Literature Review

India has been grooming to the large number of reality TV shows recently and the most
of them have been controversial to some extent with certain scenes and episodes abusing
the tradition and cultural values of the country. There are different reviews of the people
belonging to different walks of the life and the impact of the reality show is paving its
way today. The reality show debates held through different mediums has found more
criticism against such crude shows on many national television channels. The strongest
the strongest question that is blooming in the air against these is that, should reality
shows be banned?
The 17 essays in this new collection tackle the genre, industry, culture politics, and
reception of reality TV in an effort to update television scholarship. Editors Susan
Murray, NYU Department of Culture and Communication and Laurie Ouellette,
Department of Media Studies at Queens College, City University of New York, argues
that the theoretical and analytical methods in this field of television studies are no longer
sufficient tools to analyze an increasingly complex and fragmented televisual
environment. With the exception of Jennifer Mahers essay, What Do Women Watches?
Tuning into the compulsory Heterosexuality Channel, and Chad Raphaels, The
Political Economic Origins of Reality TV, the works in this book are previously
unpublished, situate global commercial strategies, and address the culture relevance and
reception of reality TV programming.
The popularity of reality TV today can easily be misunderstood, according to Chad
Raphael and Ted Magdar, who both dispute the myth that audience demand is behind the
surge of reality TV programming. Raphael traces the union battles and deregulation of
broadcasting in the 1980s, wherein political-economic conditions forced the television
industry to seek new models of cheap production, licensing, and syndication, Ted Magdar
essay. The End of TV 101, examines the business of network programming in the
2001-2002 seasons to lay bare the sweeping changes that have taken place in the

entertainment industry. Magdar reveals the three industry strategies unique to reality TV:
the heavy use of product placement; the expansion of the product tie-ins; and the
extension of the program beyond the box.
Justin Lewis research on television reception suggests that the difference between reality
and artifice remains at the heart of the pleasure and politics of television viewing
audience that forms the context of Pamela Wilsons essay, Jamming Big Brother.
Wilsons research and her close scrutiny of the actions of online communities, culture
jammers, and producers of Big Brother provides valuable and timely insight into the
complex relationship that exist between producers, participants, and audience, and her
contribution is a significant example of the type of observational research that went into
many of these essays. As one of the first collections of new research on reality TV, this
book is absolutely necessary, and it will be of use to academics, students, and anyone
seeking a better cultural understanding of the evolution and impact of this popular form.
This was Reviewed by JoAnne Stober, Concordia University.
The reality show has emerged as a visible site for contemporary debates over modern
fame. In fact while issue of taste and culture values have long since shaped
conceptions of the celebrity (Turner, Bonner, Marshall 178), the issue of fame has played
a central role in the negative culture criticisms of reality shows. In the context of fame, it
is more appropriate to suggest that a number of critical positions have emerged on reality
shows have emerged. For example, what is probably the most prevalent perspective in
circulation, contestants have persistently been constructed as exemplifying, and in many
ways accelerating, a shift towards a fame culture in which an emphasis on famous for
being famous has regrettably triumphed over the concepts of talent and hard work
(Holmes, All)(see, Marshall 9-11).
The Osbournes within an appropriate genre is to look at MTVs presentation of the show.
MTV sells The Osbournes as a reality TV sitcom and indeed its narrative structure is
loosely similar to the sitcom formula, with real-life segments edited and sequenced to be
reminiscent of a scripted program. The Osbourne seems to be more closely aligned intertextually to another most recent subgenre of sitcom, the anti-fifties sitcoms such as

Roseanne and Married with children. It is important that we realize that MTV was the
producer of this new myth. It is now a truism to that MTV changed rock n roll by
making it more image conscious. MTV had prepared the way for a performative
documentary about a rock star performing in his home by continually broadcasting into
the home images of rock star performing.
Here, reality TV contestants are seen as falling victim to the manipulative powers of
ruthless fame-making machine. Often yoked to an emphasis on the ephemeral nature of
their celebrity, here we encounter cautionary tales about the price public visibility and the
lure of immediate wealth, a penalty when, as one program put it, instant television fame
is over in a dream (Tonight with trevor McDonald, 1TV1, 13 Feb. 2004). In contrast, the
centrality of the ordinary person turned celebrity has been read in terms of
democratization, both in relation to access to the televisual airwaves (Bazalgette) and to
the dynamics of public/ media visibility itself (see Biressi and Nunn).
These positions clearly intersect, their distinctions largely inflected by the perspective of
the observer. For example, what is the producers claim to democratisation is the critics
class based distaste for all these awful ordinary people on television (see Bazalgette).
Joshuas Gamsons (Claims, Assembly) work in particular has usefully suggested a
picture in which certain positions on, or explanations of flame, have had a historical
significance in vying for cultural visibility. With the growth of the arts and technologies
and the establishment of celebrity as a mass phenomenon (see Gamson, Assembly
261), public visibility became increasingly detached from aristocratic standing, with
discourses of democracy as epitomized by the American context increasingly coming
to the fore.
While the focus may now have been predominantly on the culture of the personality,
Gamson argues that the primary narrative was still one of natural rise (Assembly,
264). The increasing prevalence of the manufacture discourse, where it henceforth
becomes what Gamson describes as a serious contender in explaining celebrity (Claims
44). In particular, he points toward the twins devices of the exposer of the process and

the construction of an ironic and mocking perspective on celebrity culture, both of which
can be seen to offer the audience a flattering position of power(Claims 276).
Reality TV shows would appear to be paradigmatic of these discursive shifts in fame.
While this report emphasize the specificity of particular formats below, reality TV in the
form of Big Boss, Indian Idol, or Comedy Nights have made a particular claim to reveal
or expose the process of fame construction. In mediating the threat of the manufacture
discourse, the evidently speak quite explicitly to an emphasis on the power of the
audience given that, through the now familiar use of interactivity (see Holmes, But),
they construct the audience as operating as the ultimate creator of the celebrity. In this
respect, without the irony or humor that has become such a pervasive aspect of
contemporary, celebrity coverage, (see Gamson, Claims, Assembly), the programs
clearly also re-peddle traditional explanation of the fame for contemporary cultural
composition (Holmes, Reality).
In the context of wider argument that star works to articulate ideas of personhood or
selfhood (Dyer, Stars), one of Richard Dyers key intervention was to suggest that stars
function to work through discourse of individualism (see also Marshall). Dyer
conceptualized this as, a separable, coherent quality, located inside consciousness and
variously termed the self, the soul, the subject The pop programs to the
celebrity-reality shows winners are often chosen and applauded because they are seen
to have been the most true to themselves.
Annette

Hills

describes

how

the

game is

to

find

the

truth

in the

spectacle/performance environment (337), and as this quite implies, this is far from
suggesting that audiences have given up on the idea of the real in reality TV (Hill
Jones).the primary site on which this is played out is the representation of the self an
arena which stardom and celebrity has historically placed center stage (Dyer, Marshall).
The impact of reality shows in India is highly abusive and immoral. These are a kind of
shows are giving a bad influence to the youth of the nation and destroying the
conventional norms of the society. There are no certain restriction between the adult
reality shows and childrens reality shows. The major part of the earning from such shows

are gone to hosts and the scene people but the one actually performing the daring scenes
are given just small part of it. Sometimes, certain participants who dont achieve success
even tend to go towards depression.

Research Methodology
Research objective
Primary objective:
1.) To study the behavior of the viewers towards reality shows.
2.) To know the future of reality shows.
3.) To study the perception of the viewers towards reality shows.
Type of data required:
For doing this research we have used both secondary and primary data.
Primary data collected in the form of questionnaire and secondary data in the form of
journals, literature and data from the internet.
Data collection method:
Data was collected through different means some of them are as follows:
1.) Personal administration of questionnaire.
2.) Secondary data collected from websites and journals.
3.) Informal interviews, survey with the individuals who use to watch TV regularly.
Target Population
Due to the nature of our research title we had focused for youth between 15 to 30
years of age as target population.
Sampling method
Method opted for this study was Non probability convenience sampling.
Sample Size
Research Type:

The type of study is Descriptive Research Design.

The study was conducted using MS Excel whereby the questionnaire was taken to the
respondents personally.
Sampling
Sampling is a definite plan for obtaining a sample from given population.
For the purpose of present study, simple random sampling has been selected from
different areas of Metro city.
o Sample size :o A sample is set of numerical data. Sample is the representative of the
population that a researcher targets to carry out a specific research, that
representative part of the population is known as sample size.
In this case I have taken sample as 100.
o Methods :100 samples from the population are selected on the basis of convenience
sampling. As the name implies, the sample are selected because they are
convenient. Convenience sampling attempts to obtain a sample of convenient
elements. Often, respondents are selected because they happen to be in the
right place at the right time.

Methods of Data Collection

o Primary research :Primary data refers to the data collected for the first time. Primary data can
provide information about demographic and socio-economic characteristics,
psycho graphic characteristics, attitude and motivation and intensions. Tools
used by me for primary research is
Questionnaire
o Secondary Research :-

Secondary data refers to the data previously collected for any purpose but can
be used in the current study. Tools used by me for secondary research are:
Websites
Journals
Magazines
Tools Used
Tools used for the study is MS Excel.
In MS Excel for data analysis I have used:

Pie-chart
Histogram
Bar-Chart
PIVOT table

I have used MS word for typing purposes and questionnaire making.

DATA AND INTERPRETATION

Q1. Are you following the reality shows lifestyle in your daily routine?

Respondents
Yes

45%

55%

Measur
es
Respon
dents

Yes

No

45

55

No

This question states that 45% out 100 samples is following life style of reality
shows in their daily routine where 55% of people are not following it.

Q2. Does it impact on your daily routine?

Chart Title
60
50
40
30
20
10
Ag
re
e

Ag
re
e

tr
al

St

St

ro
n

gl
y

ro
n

gl
y

eu

gr
ee
D
is
a

D
is
a

gr
ee

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Agre
e

Strong
ly
Agree

Responde
nts

13

29

49

This interpret that 13% of the sample population is strongly disagree with this
argument where 29% says this does not effects their personal life and 49% are
neutral to this statement as 7% does agree with it and 2% strongly emphasize it.

Q3. Do you think whatever shown in reality shows is real?

60
50
40

Sum of Strongly Disagree

Sum of Disagree

30

Sum of Neutral
Sum of Agree

20

Sum of Strongly Agree

10
0

Total

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Agree

Strong
ly
Agree

Responde
nts

14

22

49

13

This result interprets that mostly population those watches these shows are in
confusion about its existence.

Q4. Does it influence your behavior?

Respondents

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Agree

Strong
ly
Agree

Responde
nts

10

16

65

In here, the result concluded that respondents had never thought about or havent
observed this aspect of the coin.

Q5. Does it impact your personality?

Respondents
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Agree

Strong
ly
Agree

Responde
nts

29

46

25

4.5

5.5

This depicts that 29% are straightly saying no to it whereas 46% of the population
also disagree with the statement. 25% of the population shows no reaction to this
statement and none of the respondents said yes or confidently stands in favor of the
aspect of the statement.

Q6. Do you think it is good for society?

Respondents

Ag
re
e

Ag
re
e

tr
al
eu

St

St

ro
n

gl
y

ro
n

gl
y

D
is
a

D
is
a

gr
ee

gr
ee

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Agre
e

Strong
ly
Agree

Responde
nts

11

47

24

16

This interprets that 38 % of the respondents showed no response to this statement

as 21 % were in favor and 5% of the respondents supports the statement. 23 % of
the respondents said no to this statement while 13 % respondents were against the
statements.

Q7. Do you support reality shows?

Respondents

Strongly Agree; 14%

Disagree; 6%

Agree; 26%

Neutral; 54%

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Agre
e

Strong
ly
Agree

Responde
nts

54

26

14

This interprets that 26% of the audience support the reality shows and also 14% of
the respondents are positively in favor of the statement whereas 54% of the
audience showed no reaction towards it.

Q8. Does you feel right, the way they interact with viewers?

Respondents
34
27
15

re

e
re

a
tr
u

ly

a
is

tr

tr

ly

is

re

re

13

11

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Agre
e

Strong
ly
Agree

Responde
nts

11

13

34

27

15

With this response we can conclude that 15 % of the respondents are likely to
promote these shows and 27% shows appositive response towards these where
13% showed less interest in it and 11% say should not be promoted.

Q9. What type of impact does reality shows have on you? :-

a. It motivates you to present your talent.

Respondents
Strongly Disagree
Disagree

13%6%
11%
16%

Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree

54%

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

11

54

16

13

This interprets that 54 % of the respondents showed no response to this statement

as 16 % were in favor and 13 % of the respondents supports the statement. 11 %
of the respondents said no to this statement while 6 % respondents were against
the statements.

b. It effects your perception toward different things.

Respondents
Strongly Disagree
40

20

Strongly Agree

Disagree

Agree

Neutral

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Agre
e

Strong
ly
Agree

Responde
nts

19

31

37

11

This interprets that 37 % of the respondents showed no response to this statement

as 11 % were in favor and 2 % of the respondents supports the statement. 31 % of
the respondents said no to this statement while 19 % respondents were against the
statements.

c. It creates awareness in society.

Respondents
12% 4%

Strongly Disagree

11%

Disagree
Neutral

16%

Agree
Strongly Agree

57%

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

11

57

16

12

This interprets that 57 % of the respondents showed no response to this statement

as 16 % were in favor and 12 % of the respondents supports the statement. 11 %
of the respondents said no to this statement while 4 % respondents were against
the statements.

d. It boosts your moral.

Respondents
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

17

29

43

5.5

This depicts that 17% are straightly saying no to it whereas 29% of the
population also disagree with the statement. 43% of the population shows no
reaction to this statement and 9 % of the respondents said yes or confidently
stands in favor of the aspect of the statement.

e. It helps in choosing your career.

Chart Title
3
8
Respondents

42
31
16
0

10

15

20

25

30

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly Agree

35

40

45

Neutral

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

16

31

42

This depicts that 16% are straightly saying no to it whereas 31% of the population
also disagree with the statement. 42% of the population shows no reaction to this
statement and 8 % of the respondents said yes or confidently stands in favor of the
aspect of the statement.

f. It helps you in making wiser decisions.

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Sum of Strongly Disagree

Sum of Disagree
Sum of Neutral
Sum of Agree
Sum of Strongly Agree

Total

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

16

22

45

15

This interprets that 45 % of the respondents showed no response to this statement

as 15 % were in favor and 2 % of the respondents supports the statement. 22 % of
the respondents said no to this statement while 16 % respondents were against the
statements.

g. Improves your communication skills.

Respondents
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
0

10

20

30

40

50

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

11

27

49

15

60

With this response we can conclude that none of the respondents have any impact
on their communication and 15 % shows a positive response towards these where
27 % responded no in it and 11 % says it does not have any impact on their
communication skill and 49 % showed no response to it.

h. Increases understanding capability towards new possibilities.

Respondents
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Strongly Disagree Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

18

31

44

This depicts that 18% are straightly saying no to it whereas 31% of the population
also disagree with the statement. 44% of the population shows no reaction to this
statement and 7 of the respondents said yes or confidently stand in favor of the
aspect of the statement.

i. Improves creative skills.

Respondents
47

21
15

14

Ag
re
e
ro
n

gl
y

Ag
re
e

tr
al
eu

gr
ee
D
is
a

St

St

ro
n

gl
y

D
is
a

gr
ee

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

14

21

47

15

This interprets that 47 % of the respondents showed no response to this statement

as 15 % were in favor and 3 % of the respondents supports the statement. 21 % of
the respondents said no to this statement while 14 % respondents were against the
statements.

j. Improves your knowledge.

Respondents
Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree
11%1% 17%

19%
52%

Measures

Strong
ly
Disagr
ee

Disagr
ee

Neutr
al

Responde
nts

17

19

52

Strong
Agree
ly
Agree
11

With this response we can conclude that 1 % of the respondents are likely to
promote these shows and 11 % shows appositive response towards these where
19% showed less interest in it and 17% say should not be promoted and 52 %
showed no response to it.

k. Develops new career opportunities.

Respondents
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
0

10

15

20

25

30

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

13

23

38

21

35

40

This interprets that 38 % of the respondents showed no response to this statement

as 21 % were in favor and 5% of the respondents supports the statement. 23 % of
the respondents said no to this statement while 13 % respondents were against the
statements.

l. Helps in representing yourself.

Respondents
60
50
40
30
20
10
Ag
re
e
ro
n

gl
y

Ag
re
e

tr
al
eu

gr
ee
D
is
a

St

St

ro
n

gl
y

D
is
a

gr
ee

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

16

21

49

This interprets that 49 % of the respondents showed no response to this statement

as 8 % were in favor and 6% of the respondents supports the statement. 21 % of
the respondents said no to this statement while 16 % respondents were against the
statements.

m. Helps in interacting with people.

Respondents
Strongly
Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

16

48

18

This depicts that 16 % are straightly saying no to it whereas 21 % of the

population also disagree with the statement. 49 % of the population shows no
reaction to this statement and 8 % of the respondents said yes or confidently
stands in favor of the aspect of the statement.

n. Helps in improving your lifestyle.

60
50
Sum of Strongly
Disagree

40

Sum of Disagree

30

Sum of Neutral
Sum of Agree

20

Sum of Strongly
Agree

10
0

Total

Measures

Strongl
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Neutra
l

Agree

Strongl
y Agree

Respondent
s

11

18

52

19

From the above data it is very much clear that only 19 % of the audience follow
the reality show style in their life while 52% showed a neutral behavior towards it
and 18 % of the respondents said no to this statement while 19 % of these
negatively criticized it.

Limitation

Because of time constraint, the study confines only to a small cities in spite of

rural and urban cities and town.

The study only targeted to those respondents watching reality shows of metro
cities in spite of rural and urban cities or towns.

Findings and Conclusion

It was found that only 39% of the population gets motivated by the reality shows

while a major part of the 54 % showed neutral behavior.

It concludes that 13% of the total samples perception is influenced towards

different things.
It depicts that only 28% of the people think that it creates the awareness in the

society whereas 15% denies to the statement.

Reality shows are capable of boosting the morale of the people as a major part of

43% says they are neutral.

Reality shows are lacking in the field of generating career opportunities as 36% of

them behaves negatively.

It was found that 45 % of the people prefer to follow the reality shows lifestyle in

their daily life routine.

Study states that 17% of the population thinks it enable then to make wise

decision where 38% of this population contradicts this statement.

Respondents states that 18% of the people are attracted to improve their creative

skills as 47 % are neutral and 35% denies this fact.

11% of the population says that it helps in selecting their career where 42% of the
population are neutral and 47% of this statement.

SUGGESTIONS

Reality shows should produce some contents which are related to the welfare of
the society as 57% of the respondents were neutral.
Shows must use more influencieve techniques to boost the morale of the people as
43% of the respondents behave neutrally.
The study shows that only 45% of the respondents were following these shows on
daily basis so they need to develop more attractive content and twist which binds
the people towards it.
Reality shows must use more influencieve motivational tools to motivate the other
viewers to come and present their talent in front of the television.
Reality shows should provide the information relating to the new opportunities of
career and enables the viewer to think in its reference.

Annexure

Impact of Reality Shows on Youth

Disclaimer: - Please note that the information collected by you is for study purpose only and
your identity will be kept anonymous. So, please feel free to answer the questions below.
Q1. Do you watch television?
Yes

No

Q2. How much time do you spend on watching television?

0-2 hrs.

More
than 6
Q3. What type of things do you watch on television regularly?
o

2-4 hrs.

4-6 hrs.

o News
o Serials
o Movies o
o Sports
o Knowledge Channels
o Others
Q4. Do you watch reality shows?

Reality Shows

o Yes
o No
Q5. How much time do you spend watching reality shows?
o

0-2 hrs.

2-4 hrs.

More
than 4
Q6. Why do you prefer to watch reality shows?
o

It puts
me in
good
mood.

o It
shows
real
things.

It makes
me learn
new
things.

Reality
shows
are
entertaini
ng.

Other
s.

Q7. What type of reality shows you like to watch?

o

Dance
based.

Singing
based.

Cooking
based.

People
o
behaviour
based.

Talks
o
based.
Comed
y
based.

Knowledg o
e based.

Talent
represent
ation
based.

Others.

Q8. On what channel do watch reality shows?

o

Zee TV.

Channel
TV.

Color
s.

MTV
o
.

Star Plus.

Others.

Q9. What inspires you to watch reality shows the most?

Dance
.

Singing.

Talks.

Knowled
ge.

Cookin
g.

People
behavio
ur.

Comed
y.

Others.

o
o

Talent
representatio
n.

Q10. Are you following the reality shows lifestyle in your daily routine?
o

Yes

No

Q11. Does it impact on your daily routine?

o

Strongl o
y
Disagre
e

Disagre o
e

Neutra
l

Agre
e

Strongly
Agree

Q12. Do you think

whatever shown in

reality shows is real?

o

Strongl o
y
Disagre
e

Disagre
e

Strongl o
y
Disagre
e

Disagr
ee

Strongl
y
o Disagre
Strongl
e
y
Disagre
e
o Strongl
y
Disagre
e
o Strongl
y
Disagre
e
o

o
o

Neutr
al

Neutr
al

Agree

Agree

Strongly
Agree

Q13. Does it influence

your behaviour?

Strongly Agree

Disagr o Neutra o Agree

o Strongly Agree
ee
l
Disagree o Neutra o Agree
o Strongly Agree
l

Disagre
e

Disagr
ee

Neutra
l

Neutra
l

Agree

Agree

impact does reality shows have on you? :-

Strongly Agree

Q14. Does it impact

your personality?
Q15. Do you think it is
good for society?
Q16. Do you
support reality
shows?
Q17. Does you feel
right, the way they
interact with
viewers?

Strongly Agree

Q18. What type of

Ratings

Strongly
Disagree

Characteristics
It motivates you to
present your talent.
It effects your
perception toward
different things.
It creates awareness in
society.
It boosts your moral.
It helps in choosing your career.
It helps you in making
wiser decisions.
Improves your
communication skills.
Increases understanding
capability towards new
possibilities.
Improves creative
skills.
Improves your
knowledge.
Develops new career
opportunities.
Helps in representing
yourself.
Helps in interacting
with people.
Helps in improving
your lifestyle.

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly
Agree

Bibliography
1. Pamela Wilson; http://www.cjconline.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/1578/1732
2. Susan Murray, NYU Department of Culture and Communication and Laurie
Ouellette, Department of Media Studies at Queens College, City University of
New York; http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/faculty/Susan_Murray
3. Book 17 essays by Editors Susan Murray, NYU Department of Culture and
Communication and Laurie Ouellette, Department of Media Studies at Queens
College, City University of New York.
4. http://www.slideshare.net/chandan9211/effect-of-reality-shows-on-youth
5. Chad Raphael and Ted Magdar; http://journal.sonicstudies.org/vol03/nr01/a01
6. http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0411/07-holmes.php; http://journal.mediaculture.org.au/0411/07-holmes.php
7. JoAnne Stober, Concordia University; http://www.cjconline.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/1578/1732
8. Gamson;
http://www.academia.edu/1807070/Talking_alone_Reality_TV_emotions_and_au
thenticity
9. Biressi and Nunn; http://books.google.co.in/books?id=tcLfBSK3JEC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&
f=false