Darn!
Forgot that i was reading the Times and tuned in for the pictures.
2
I might have checked it out but I try to avoid pernicious vomiting.
2
Gross, the only applicable word for this trash. Okay, two then.
4
Much "Big Brother" ado about nothing. It's just another dumb reality show for the uneducated. You want cameras surveilling every single individual? Go to China.
5
The title of this smutty show should be "Pleasure Island".
After all, no love exists there, just pleasure....
3
This sounds just like a Navy ship with males and females.
2
Isn't it a little precious to try to draw profound social lessons from soft porn?
3
The decline of civilization continues....enthusiastically, cluelessly, shamelessly.
Excuse me while I vomit.
4
People who sign up for these stupid shows know what they are getting into because they have seen a variation on the theme on some other show. Their lives must be empty if they have nothing better to do than waste their time being humiliated. The real question is what kind of people have nothing better to do than waste their time watching this drivel? The fear of the 1950s that watching TV will turn people into idiots is coming true.
5
If this is going to be presented here on CBS there's not a chance in the world that anything resembling actual sex will be shown or heard during the telecast. There will, of course, be a load of innuendoes and a whole pile of prurience, just as we've come to expect from "The Bachelor" and its distaff version over on ABC. And here, too, we'll discover that many of the contestants aren't in it to find love OR money (at least not the kind of money that a show like this offers the "winners"). In brief (or briefs) they're there for the celebrity, for the head-start that an appearance on a show of this sort can give them in order to launch their respective "brands." Who knows: one of these jerks may end up in the Oval Office some day. It wouldn't be the first time.
comment submitted on 7/9 at 10:18 PM
4
I apologize to my inner self for even being drawn into this trap and reading this article. Why does the NY Times print this drivel about something that is even more "drivelable"? I suspect it is to suggest that we, as a society, along with glancing at the "rags" at the supermarket check out counter or spending one second of our time listing to the liar who occupies the oval office, can be mislead over and over into the most mundane of life efforts. I will be more selective in the future.
Humans are idiots.
3
Accidentally got sucked into about 10 minutes of this. REALLY? Is this what passes for 'entertainment'? Jack in PA is so right. Turn it off; grab a book. "You'll have a much better time."
1
That this voyeurism passes for entertainment, and that there is an audience for such is quite depressing. Just seeing the promotions for it, with the vapid hostess is enough to give me acid reflux. Why does summer always bring us this trash? "Jersey Shore", "Big Brother", etc. ad nauseum. Who watches this junk?
15
Give people the right to be in any show they want. And if you, as a viewer, do not like the show, do not watch it. The author of the article is so upset about so-called "exploitation", but fails to notice that for most of the participants of this show the alternative would be working a graveyard shift at a fast food restaurant for a minimum wage. At least some of them have a chance of entertainment industry career afterwards. There is a reason why candidates line up for hours to be considered as a potential contestant on Love Island. Liberal activists who are ready to be upset on behalf of everyone for any reason, should back off and find a hobby.
1
"Bread and circuses for the masses", a tried and true method of distraction.
1
This will become a huge hit in the U.S. and that will be a very good reason to institute universal civics literacy tests for voters.
2
This is one of those weird moments where a Trumpism is actually fitting.
Namely: "Sad".
The producers, the participants, the viewers. All sad.
3
It still amazes me. How empty must your life have to be before you'd willingly sit like a slug in front of television to watch junk like this?
3
There’s another show here in the States called Game of Games. Starting Ellen DeGeneres the action combines the simplest quiz questions you ever heard ( the contestants almost always blow it), with really horrible humiliation. DeGeneres smirks through it all aware that the contestants have no pride and are eminently mockable.
3
We’re a degenerate culture, similar to the days of the gladiators in Ancient Rome. Sickening.
2
Ugh, ugh, ugh! Can I opt out of becoming a globe of peeping toms?
1
"There will be no “outside” for us to leave for, no surveillance-free home to return to. In a real surveillance state, even the surveillants must live under the all-seeing eye. Without an “outside,” there are only other contestants within the bubble to film, monitor and confront one another. And what’s worse — being watched by Big Brother, or being watched by your fellow increasingly crazed and desperate
comrades?"
chilling dear author. chilling.
1
And I thought "Black Mirror" was just dystopian sci fi. Turns out it was a pilot for this horror show.
Sez you. Riveting is the absolute last wrd I'd use. The concept is pretty simply to understand: Alice breaks up with Ben and takes up with Charlie. What I don't understand is So What? Why would anybody care?
3
I think this is more about people returning to their primal instincts when everything seems to be taken away from them and there’s no sense of time.
Raw emotions simmer up and nobody really has anything of value to do except picking fights with each other like children cramped in the backseat of a car on a long trip and using sex to instigate another battle royale.
Of course big Brother is watching and listening in the entire time.
Yawn.
1
Isn’t this exactly what “1984” was trying to warn us about? Either you are the “Watcher” or destined to be the “Watched.” What is this penchant the human psyche has for watching other humans who prefer to make fools of themselves? Even bonobos would rather “do it” themselves than watch others have all the fun. Perhaps Orwell had much greater insight into human nature than we give him for—as attested by the popularity of Instagram, Facebook, and all the other “Selfie” media available in the Cloud today. Big Brother is happily watching your every move. 2084.
drhiguera
Could we please stop using the words “human rights violation” to describe people who consent to participate in these reality TV programs? They are extremely exploitative, yes. But they’re not akin to what is happening in a real surveillance state like China or even what is happening here in our “migrant detention facilities.” I expect better from The Times. Op eds like this sensationalize outrage for invented problems when what we need is more real journalism about things that actually matter.
3
The writer seems oblivious to today’s world of selfies, instagram, Kardashians and endless nonsense. Human rights violation?
There’s no bigger right than the right to consent to be publicly humiliated.
2
Ugh, watching a show like that would be absolute torture. Sounds truly vile.
1
So now we're also voyeurs because we're reading about this addition to the 'fake reality show' line up.
I cannot imagine WHY I read every word to the very end of the article about this trash, but it must be the same motivation that causes so many people to WATCH this trash.
Bread and Circuses. Well, bread isn't necessary since most of us are overfed, but surely circuses.
The first reality TV show was in the 70’s, aired on PBS, and simply followed a family around their house, lives, etc. No scripting, no producer added drama, etc. The parents divorced shortly after the filming ended. No one can take the stress of being “on” all the time.
9
I couldn't watch it for more than 10 minutes. Totally contrived like "The Batchelor" and silly as "Big Brother" but morally bankrupt. So many fake boobs, so many fake smiles, and so much limited vocabulary. Why did every female feel the need to laugh and laugh and giggle? Why did every male feel the need to walk like a model and put on a fake smile? Why did the network want to embarrass itself? Hopefully the sponsors will come to their senses and pull the plug.
9
Watching this show sounds as dehumanizing as watching porn. If I had underage children I wouldn't dream of letting them watch it, lest they be led to objectify all potential sexual and love partners.
5
This whole concept is an exceedingly worrisome indicator of the LOW level to which the mentality of the “American People” has deteriorated.
It seems apparent why our last election turned out the way it did.
1
It's bizarre how a culture whose people often display a level of piety that is epically predatory, who claim to be utterly repulsed by pornography, and who hold up the Bible up as the unerring Word of God, nevertheless will make a hit of show about people who "drink, gossip... maneuver behind one another’s backs, tell baldfaced lies and “sneak off” to have sex."
And since this is on CBS, someone has already figured out that there are an awful lot of churchgoers in the heart of America who will want to fit this into their calendar between midweek prayer meeting and Sunday service.
46
@S Jones
Makes perfect sense for people to obsess over what they're not supposed to indulge in, secretly (or not) desire to experience for themselves. It's not a healthy mindset.
3
before coming across this op-ed in the Times, i’d never before heard of this show. as i read on, i grew more and more disgusted with the show and its premise. i’m almost tempted to ask how exploitative shows like this one exist. except i do know how and why: because the audience exists. i’m embarrassed to admit that by the end of the article, i not only felt disgusted but also simultaneously excited to add this to my tuesday prime time tv queue. i’m the rubber-necker as are so many others.
increased government surveillance is a serious and debatable issue for many reasons. this article also suggests that increased apathy to exploitative and sensationalized media is a byproduct of entertainment-oriented or -focused surveillance accessible to the masses. this is not a good thing. this is a terrifying thing.
1
There is a powerful historical antecedent to the issues raised in this piece. Those of us who worked in or even just visited the former Soviet Union, had to assume that at any time--or all the time--the state was surveilling us. On leaving the country, most felt a palpable sense of relief as "the memory of life on 'the outside' rushing back to them." China, today, is coming to live the dream. (So, too, unfortunately, is the USA.)
7
This is a choice though. They know absolutely everything that will happen, and choose it. They sound like the typical 'innocent' drug mule - they knew what they were doing, but were so tempted by the idea of quick money and a celebrity life that they did it anyway. And when the consequences hit, they are unwelcome, and not what was hoped for, but still - they are what you signed up for - worse for this show - what you auditioned for, competed against other people to get into.
4
It sounds banal enough to be a hit in the USA.
Given the numerous real human rights violations being committed by the administration this made for TV shows ranks at the very bottom of importance.
I would rather have a root canal than watch it.
10
Considering how far and how quickly we've devolved as a 'culture,' there's a certain quaintness to this popular form of entertainment that cleverly conflates low self esteem, narcissistic
schadenfreude and voyeurism. Ironically, this is not exactly Breaking News since it's exactly what we've allowed ourselves to be spoon fed and indulge in for millenia.
Instead of calling the sequel Love Island II, I'd say Dystopia would be more fitting.
3
We’ve been doing this to other species for hundreds of years. It’s called “zoo”. It was just a matter of time when we put humans there.
44
@BWCA
Nonsense.
With 5% of humanity America has 25% of the world's prisoners.
And although only 13% of Americans are black like Ben Carson and Tim Scott about 40% of the prisoners are black. Because blacks are persecuted for acting like white people do without any criminal justice consequences.
It is called ' jail' or ' prison.'
2
The show that most closely resembles the reality of my middle-class life and family is "Everybody Loves Raymond".
1
Wow!
Premiers Tuesday night on CBS, you say. Can't wait!
Good to know that the country which gave us Chaucer, Shakespeare and Dickens is still leading the way in English language entertainment.
14
I would bet they are very aware of the cameras and know, a la Trump, a la any good showman or conman, that controversy and scandal are likely to keep the ratings high. They are there for self-promotion above all. That's where we are these days. We don't aspire to be better and we are shameless.
6
@Andy
Nope.
That's where some few individuals are, and these days they have a role they can choose to play.
I have had debates with friends ever since 2001 about this issue. I remember originally, people said I was very negative, because I argued people will not only get used to a surveillance society, they will eventually embrace it. "No way," they would say, human beings will not tolerate being turned into constant subjects of being watched, monitored, etc.
I have a different view of human nature. It adapts to whatever conditions confront it, and each generation takes as normal what the preceding generation is hesitant about.
I rest my case, sadly.
7
They are not allowed to READ? I wouldn't last 30 seconds.
Thank God I don't watch TV anymore. Shut off the tube and pick up a book, already. You'll have a much better time.
79
@Jack Connolly Indeed. BUT, people below the age of at least 30 don't watch TV anymore. They watch their computers. The line between reading and watching is becoming technologically murky.
2
And we wonder how, we as a society, ended up with a reality show President...
9
An exercise in voyeuristic Total Narcissism...'All ME...All Day"!
And life imitates art as this is a replay of "The Truman Show"
1
Thank you for writing about this horrible trend of putting humans literally in a naked cage mentality.
What this article is not talking about is the suicides among these participants in general.
According to a count by the New York Post, 21 reality TV stars from different shows have died from suicide since 2004.
As quoted on Refinery29, Gail Saltz, M.D., an associate professor of psychiatry at the New York Presbyterian Hospital Weill-Cornell School of Medicine said, "Being on a reality TV show is no doubt a huge stressor, with the potential for humiliation and shame,” and “These shows aren’t banking on viewers tuning in to see contestants having a jolly time. It often involves drama or something terrible, humiliating, or shameful. As a mental health professional, can’t say I’m a fan.”
The exposure and lewdness associated with having intimate sexual acts for all to see, this is a new visual form of prostituting yourself. Awful.
9
@Ash.
In fairness though - what percent of these people were already mentally unstable to some degree, just based on their willingness to go on these shows? No one normal would choose this. No one even close to normal would subject themselves to this.
8
@SusanStoHelit
I agree fully.
Isn't it worse abuse of the people who already have psychological issues. They purport that they have psychologists present at these sites... all hogwash.
The entire premise is wrong and humiliating, how do these producers even do this to other humans. Where is your conscious?
2
Quite possibly the stupidest of the litany of stupidity that is reality TV. If I want to watch ordinary morons, go through day to day life, I’ll look in the mirror.
15
There is too much crap on media already. Especially "reality peeping on people" shows garbage. There's a sickening lack of imagination!
10
"Forbidden to read magazines, watch television or surf the internet.."
I like how magazines were specified and not 'books'.
I've never watched the show but I think I know the contestants.
12
Nicely done, sans the awful headline for which Jeong is probably not responsible.
The headline should be, "If you care about the best part of America, do not under any circumstances watch this totalitarian drivel."
7
We live in the Matrix. I wasn't going to watch, I am still not going to watch, and I am certain our overlords are displeased by this. (Attention: tongue is in cheek!)
3
I firmly believe that the only reality TV show worth watching is "Antiques Roadshow".
39
@Katrink
The only reality show I can bear is "Say Yes to the Dress."
2
@Katrink
My guilty pleasure is the 'reality' show Great British Baking Show.
1
@Katrink - I'm still hooked on Survivor. I love Wednesday night when I crank up the heat, put on my favorite hoody, jammies, and fuzzy slippers while surrounding myself with brie cheese, stuffed olives, margueritas, cannabis, strawberries and whipped cream. I stuff my face listening to some poor sorority chick crying about how hungry she is because she was too stupid to study the flora and fauna of the island she was gonna spend a month on. That, and I love watching the young buff guys run around in their wet underwear trying to impress the girls who are crying about how hungry they are.
It sort of reminds me of being in school except now, I sit at the cool table and all of the "cool" kids wish they were with me eating strawberries and whipped cream instead of snails in the cold rain.
2
If you don't like the show, you don't have to watch.
2
@Alex The point of this opinion article is that as surveillance becomes commonplace in our real life you will no longer have a choice not to participate. "Love Island" is just a show, but real life monitoring of our movement, on and offline is not, and you might not have to the option to turn it off. That said, the show seems exceedingly vapid, and as you suggest, I don't plan to watch.
15
So leave electronics outside of the bedroom, problem solved.
@rc
That's not remotely true though. There are no cameras in my bedroom. To expect privacy out in public is nonsense - we've never had that - but our privacy hasn't been hurt by a show you have to audition and beg to get onto.
I love the American version! Nearly an exact replica, but of course since over here we are so much more enlightened and free when it comes to sex and such, we get to actually see that, as well. Yay for us!
Who watches this insipid pap? How truly deplorable.
22
Actually, England has the most surveillance cameras per person, so contestants have "no surveillance-free home to return to."
10
Some shows have predominantly male viewership -- Nascar, sports, etc. Some have predominantly female viewership -- this show is one of them. I guess many of us love competition.
These days, boys will be boys and girls will be girls, and too often TV producers will be even bigger embarrassments.
2
What is truly scary for me isn't what the contestants agree to go through. Instead, it is the number of people who enjoy this kind of artificial yet demeaning spectacle.
36
Re: '...No one remembers the cameras are there..."
Perhaps...the cameras ARE there, but...as I've NEVER watched any of these shows / change the channels when their advertising is shown...my consumer's eyeballs ARE NOT there...
9
This is a silly, melodramatic read. The amount of snide negativity is off-putting, and hardly accurate (for one thing, there is no crowd waiting for the Islanders when the leave the villa). On paper the show is, of course, dystopian by nature--hence the name of its predecessor Big Brother. This lack of privacy reality TV format is well played out, but what the author is missing in this piece is the charm and sheer authenticity in the personalities and the show as a whole. It's captivating not because its a glorified ant-farm, it's an extremely personal and involved show. I don't believe it will translate well in the US, but if the author had watched the show rather than reading about it, Love Island would have been given more of a fair shake.
1
I've decided that I will keep my current non-monitoring car forever, never get an Alexis, etc,. avoid all "smart" appliances, and take all the actions I can to protect my privacy. If that makes me a Luddite, then I'll wear the name proudly.
40
@sjs
Your current non monitoring car is going to break down eventually. I just wish that my new, monitored car had not already had 2 recalls and an air conditioner failure. I tape over the camera on my computer, bought the last not smart T V at Best Buy, do not want a smart phone and do not have Alexa. However my little grandson turns on Siri immediately when he comes over and it is very clear to me that my Internet searches are tracked.
I'm glad that I am old because I'm not happy with the directions these things are going. What does continue to puzzle me is that people are lining up and paying to be surveilled by Big Brother. And then there is the endless shame parade on T.V. There is no dignity.
3
This sounds like the most repulsive TV show ever. So I assume it will be a monster hit here.
147
@Bob R
Gosh, I hope you are wrong, but...
I cannot understand the mindset of people who produce, act in, and watch this trash. But then I remember 40 percent of this country loves the idiot-in-chief.
30
CBS's affirmation of the age of voyeurism. I hope they left room in Mr. Paley's grave for him to spin.
5
I have seen commercials for this show and I can't imagine watching it. The reality shows are produced by shallow and greedy people and the participants are exhibitionists who are willing to lose all their dignity in the hopes of making a buck. The people who watch these shows must have very boring and empty lives. Personally, I would rather watch old re-runs of "Law and Order."
28
@Carole A. Dunn Sad to say, but many times the old reruns of Law and Order are the best that contemporary TV has to offer.
8
Yes, especially the ones with the late, great Jerry Orbach.
6
I watched for less than five minutes. What trash. Says a great deal about the British population that this is popular. I suspect it will be just as popular here. Circuses while the world is drowning, baking and dying.
23
I shouldn't be gobsmacked by a bunch of know it alls who don't enjoy reality tv. It is a specific pleasure and I would say if you don't really watch it you shouldn't weigh in on what it means. You sound like pompous and sanctimonious parents who just like to hear yourselves drone on. And what you say always devolves into a personal liturgy. It happens that love island has much to recommend it. It coincides with a fantasy we all have. That if people could just get to know us that they would fall in love even if we aren't the most beautiful. Watching people fall in love and the alchemy of love that makes us want to be kind. It is not a Stanford Experiment bringing out the worst and ugliest aspects of human beings. I see the science the cameras, but the behaviors are opposite. We watch people in very real and private and moments. How they handle the challenge of being stripped. Let them wear make-up and muscles it doesn't cover up that they've been stripped and that we see real emotion.
2
@Elastic Pinch: But you're not really observing those people being realistic with their emotions and actions. ALL of this is highly edited, and participants are encouraged to act out 24/7. If you want to see real people acting according to their true selves, don't watch reality TV. Simple!
16
@Plato Our world is full of people whose major "experiences" are "simulated"---presided over by folks who get rich providing the "simulation". Very sad.
4
@Elastic Pinch
I love TV, but I would never ever watch this show. Ugly
1
The people who are on "Love Island" chose to be; no one is forcing them to wear swimsuits all the time, have uncomfortable microphones on their backs, and stay in the house where the clocks are set to the wrong time. Clearly stated before entering the show, is that the cameras will be on contestants for most, maybe all of the show."Forgetting" is nobody's fault but the contestants, it is their choice to continue with the show. The fault goes to no one except for themselves when the harsh statements made about the others on the show become aired, because, as I have stated before, they are for-warned that everything will be recorded. Allowing yourself to be exposed on camera in that way, is ones choice, and if the people on the show are fine with the conditions in the beginning and throughout, but have a problem in the end, no one forced them to say anything that was said. It is called self control, and knowing your limits. They are notified in the beginning of cameras at every angle in which you turn. Having "something to hide" is a choice, knowing that you have something to hide and still going on a show in which cameras on a person all the time, is a choice. Knowing that you are on camera one-hundred percent of the time should determine your limits and how you control yourself on the show. "Love Island" is just another reality show in which viewers and contestants are going to pick apart because it is not what they had in mind.
4
@Reagan
Everything you say is true, but you could say the same about every idiot who is on YouTube or the talk shows or anything else that shows people at their stupidest. That doesn't mean it has any value or that anybody should watch. It actually not fun to watch people destroy themselves.
1
The shows are set up to minimize the time that people do something that will bore the viewers. They cannot read, watch TV, or surf the Internet. I presume decks of cards and party games are banned; the latter could get personal interactions started but could also become talent contests of mediocre talents, which would be boring except if they involved votes which players could scheme to rig.
"I think, therefore I am" is out. We are back to "man is a political animal", but with a new twist. "To be is to be perceived" can morph into "Everything is a reflection of everything else from its own perspective". People are the prime reflectors and reflected, however, so to exist is to have Twitter, Instagram, and/or Facebook followers, and being conscious of one's own nonexistence becomes a reason for suicide.
The medium is the message. What was a route to outside reality has itself become the reality. Now what is really real is this process itself, which means that reality (at least our human reality) is historical and dialectical. Marx extended this understanding to economics. We are in trouble as Americans because we do not think dialectically even though we are at present the main source of this dialectic via social media.
We are watching reality dissolve; our president is the chief dissolver. We lack the words and concepts to describe what is happening and are unlikely to overcome it if we do not have the tools to think and understand it.
15
We live in "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism" writes Professor Shoshana Zuboff of Harvard in her recent book of that title, and reality-TV shows like "Love Island" seek to normalize the ubiquitous commercialization and monetization of every aspect of human experience this new mutation of capitalism entails. For the past 40 years, we have also lived in an age of neoliberalism, where the state's primary role is to facilitate capitalism by enhancing market opportunities, privatizing public institutions, reducing tax burdens on business, and removing obstacles to profit like environmental regulations and labor unions. If there's something unseemly about popular TV spectacles like "Love Island," I think it's fair to blame it on the climate created by modern capitalism, no?
9
I am an American college student coming off a year of studying abroad in London. I lived in a dorm mostly with UK students. When Season 5 premiered, the entire dorm gathered around the television to watch. I had never seen a show which captured and interested so many, not since perhaps American idol fever when I was younger. What is especially interesting to me is that it airs basically live 6 days a week. Thus, it skews far more Truman Show than any other show currently on the US reality show currently.
15
@COM - "I had never seen a show which captured and interested so many..."
:)) You are too young to remember the day the United States came to a screeching halt to watch Luke and Laura get married.
1
Gross.
26
So the participants are forced to wear swimwear all the time, they have sex on camera, there is zero privacy... what a hypocritical soft-porn load of garbage. People are such hypocrites. It is obvious that 99% of viewers will watch this trash just because of the naked bodies and the free sex, certainly not for the psychodramas or to see who wins at the end.
It would be much better (and far less hypocritical) if highly paid professional porn actors and actresses participated in a unlimited, free-for-all sex "reality" show on an adult cable channel. At least the participants would get fair pay for their work, they would probably enjoy it more than these hapless amateurs, and the viewers would not have to embarrass themselves by pretending that they are watching the show for some other implausible reason.
10
@Andy
I saw a few minutes of it and keep thinking "please put on some clothes"
3
@Andy Interesting suggestion, Andy, that we simply make it official, and watch professional porn "actors" on TV.
I suspect that many people watch porn for the euphoric thrill of fantasizing that they themselves are the porn stars. Perhaps those same people prefer the sex on Love Island for the thrill of thinking "I could do better than this".
Sounds really dumb. There isn't a better show to export to the US?
3
The show is crap and debases all of us. An intellectual debate of "Love Island" in the ear of Trump? Waste of good paper, ink and time.
6
Not sure what is more appalling, that someone would make this show or that people want to watch it. It is so easy to talk about the plutocratic rot of Jeffrey Epstein - but this is the moral rot of the masses. We are in trouble.
200
@Les
... or that people would want to be in it.
20
One word: pass.
6
It sure must be the Silly Season when a so-called "reality show" makes an NTY op-ed piece.
This really speaks volumes about those willing to be participants on these shows, and their willingness to suffer such hardship and humiliation to get what..... their 15 minutes of fame? I guess some will get an acting role.
Speaking of reality show ordeals. I watched "Naked and Afraid" and I was thing (besides getting my rocks off) is that they sure must be getting a million bug bites
2
What if one of the contestant "couples" found that they really cared for each other? Perhaps even fell in love? Would they be "dumped", boo-ed on the way out, for the crime of sincerity?
1
Does this show or any other show of it's kind surprise anyone? In this day and age of instant stardom, no matter how brief, people are willing to expose and humiliate themselves for all to see. The people who watch this drivel are akin to slowing down at a car crash.
We don't interact normally anymore. We are all potential celebrities just an upload away from fame and fortune.
FaceBook, Instagram, Twitter etc., have created this mess. Unfortunately, I don't see a way of reversing it.
6
@New Milford " The people who watch this drivel are akin to slowing down at a car crash. "
Worse. It's akin to stopping, getting out of the car, and filming the scene.
4
Our voyeuristic fascination has made us repulsively dull. Desperate to connect we blindly walk misguided in the wrong direction, moths to the flame of a flickering screen. We’ve gone from using a camera to freeze an innocuous moment to reveal the profound in the mundane to this, watching people lose themselves and hopefully have sex, like those hidden camera moments catching lions attacking hyenas in a darkened Saharan night. We are becoming hideous, cultivating and celebrating our lowest impulses and destroying ourselves in the meantime.
13
@Low Notes Liberate
So true, but I will make one hopeful observation: At least today we attempt to prosecute the likes of Jeffrey Epstein. In ancient Rome the sexual exploitation of slaves was completely acceptable - as were orgies and a whole buffet of deviant behaviors. It took the fall of the empire and the arrival of Christianity to shift the paradigm to the extent that it actually could.
Yet voyeurs and exhibitionists are always with us. And now our technology makes it extremely easy and rewarding to be one or the other. We have entered the land of lost toys.
Sad thing is, more people will probably watch this junk than the nightly news or the next Democratic debates.
11
Odd that this article failed to mention the former Love Island participant who recently committed suicide.
6
I keep wondering how anyone can self justify making themselves get pimped out for sooo very little. We need to explore the mentality of those who believe this is amusing or entertaining. And the quality of the viewers gives one pause too.
If this is TV for the majority, then I think we need to face this reality....We've got some pretty weird people and even more to fear from the fact that I suspect, all of these encounters, border on the pathetic.
I've got a marvelous pile of books to read and will extend my sympathies to CBS another time when I can find some. How this got justified is mind boggling....
6
@Margot LeRoy TV Payoffs are always stingy in Britain, including actors' salaries, which is why Brits who watch the original Price is Right and Wheel of Fortune are surprised at the seemingly lavish amounts and prizes American contestants win.
1
@globalnomad - Imagine what they think of Oprah. "You've won a car! And you! And you, and you and you! And we're all going to Australia!!!!!"
The type of people applying for this show wouldn't be the sort able to organize themselves into a wonderful experience together - of cooking, talking, teaching, coming up with interesting things to do. These types of programs have given us a voyeuristic, sadistic culture; this is what passes for entertainment. Terrible.
11
An important fact from the British "Love Island" - at least two former subjects of this cheap, manipulative mass entertainment have committed suicide after being on the show. Bread and circuses, indeed - after the stress of having your emotions played with for the millions that can be made from your venerability and what is left of your dignity, former members of this perversion are tossed aside and left to deal with their lives and their emotions on their own. The total death toll from reality TV is over 38, I believe. Imagine a world in which we did not treat each other this way, just to make money for soulless media executives..... and to keep all those bored eyes out there distracted from their very real problems.....
118
"What is man, that You are mindful of him?...For You have made him a little lower than the angels, and crowned him with glory and honor..."
The Psalmist apparently never watched "Love Island."
5
It is 'hate island ".
The All seing Eye is on all the Dollar bill and in the US SEAL.
The so called Eye of Providence.
It is a very complex ideological concept related to antique myths (Osiris - Seth ) and 18th century Illuminati .
Masonic ideas, etc... not exactly anything to do with love .
5
I haven't had a TV for four years, so I won't be watching this junk, but that aside, I am more than a little enamored with the idea of public surveillance. Unfortunately and sadly, it's a necessity, and always has been: If God had kept a better eye on Adam and Eve, we wouldn't be here.
A cop's job is to watch people closely, to surveil, thus the ubiquitous sunglasses, cameras, speed-traps, and undercover ops. Why? We need policing.
I'm told that Walmart has given up on stopping most petty thievery, just the big ticket items now are monitored. For decades, convenience stores, retail stores, and others have had to install spy cams. They even have to watch us pumping gasoline. The IRS employs thousands of agents to check and audit our tax forms. Years ago, coming back from Vietnam, we troops were strip-searched at an airport. (I am still shocked by that, but times were extraordinary.)
Teachers watched us in schools, and employers supervise, i.e., oversee, us at work.
There's a pattern here. And tightwad employers wouldn't spend big bucks for surveillance unless they had to.
Now many adults are armed; some are criminals, some are mentally disturbed. So I appreciate surveillance: We too often abuse our freedom. (I'm not doing anything illegal so I'm okay with it, and I understand that when I'm in public, I am going to be watched, just like at work. It's just how it is because that's who we are. And surveillance might save my life and yours.)
3
@Jim Muncy You give up on privacy too easily. It, surveillance, is rarely used for ones benefit. Too much of our info is being put out "there". The world is less dangerous than Trump would lead us to believe and in an equitable society much safer. Ours, the U.S. is not equitable and perhaps becomes less safe. Change that and we become more safe. Giving more power to the government especially corrupt power hungry politicians like the Republicans is not a good idea.
4
There’s yet another dimension here: Who’s watching the watchers? Content providers monitor, aggregate, analyze, store, and sell massive amounts of data about who watches what, when, and from where. Who besides advertisers acquires those data, and what for?
4
Are we being monitored constantly, to perhaps imbue transparency in all we do? And I thought this was fictional at best (and for illustration, you may want to read Egger's "The Circle", where all of us are walking around with a video device trumpeting our deeds and misdeeds, perhaps with an authoritarian voice of reason demanding we repent should we derail into human imperfections).
1
When will people realize the value of personal privacy? The egos are astounding.
7
@Michelle B Check out the other story on the NYT website about the YouTube star Emma Chamberlain. She curates and films her entire life for public viewing, and makes money at it. It's so disturbing and sad.
3
The fact that humiliation and bad behavior are packaged for "entertainment" - that producers are paid handsomely for and cocooned legally by NDA's and non-disparagement contract clauses- is nauseating. Let the games begin. May the odds be in your favor.
5
All reality shows are awful. Many years ago, I used to say that reality shows like Survivor and Big Brother would be the downfall of Western civilization. This comment was made tongue-in-cheek, or so I thought! Because now we have a reality show huckster occupying the White House who is destroying our country and the rest of the world, one Twitter post at a time. When will this dysfunctional version of reality end?
64
@Taylor
Never, because as we all watch these shows we get dumber and dumber thus expanding the potential audience.
7
@Taylor - I never miss an episode of Survivor. Watching young people splash around in the water on a tropical island is one way I combat the winter blues here. For one hour a week, I'm given hope that I might see the sun again some day. Not today, but some day. No guns, no politics, no deep thought, just wet swimsuits and beautiful sunsets.
The aristocracy at Versailles had nothing on us. We actually film it.
26
A show based on mixing exhibitionism with voyeurism,they and the audience all know the cameras are running.
The real question is “who cares”?
7
Absolutely no redeeming value. What has America become?
27
@John I think you answered your own question.
2
This isn't surveillance. This is collusion between exhibitionists and voyeurs.
81
@M. Casey
I do not consent.
3
I ask my friends if the live feeds that "Hey Google!" and "Nest" represent in their home gives them pause and they invariably reply that they don't care. They extoll the convenience of a "Google Home" and such. The value of such convenience will wither when they finally realize that they "can't go outside" anymore and, even if they could, they'd be lost without some soothing navigation voice to tell them where to go. The problem is: they probably won't notice even when it is way too late, if it isn't already. The age of total surveillance is here, but convenience rules their decision making. Soon enough, the ability to be a conscientious hermit, free of prying eyes and ears, will be a mystical dream confined to the past for all but the most determined analog curmudgeons. Long may they resist!
11
@Gowan McAvity
I think about this in relation to my google home devices. Isn't it the case that your smart phone has the same software installed on it? So, if you have a smartphone, you are being surveilled to the same degree that you are with a device like google home, or amazon alexa, or whatever siri thing apple has? To escape this, you need to ditch the smart phone correct?
1
@Matt
I turn off location services and microphone, but yes, if the device can record, it can be hacked to do so without your knowledge. The the "internet of things" (ie devices) in the home have much weaker security and are therefore much more vulnerable. In the end, if the convenience of the device or services are indispensable then surveillance is enabled. It is this tension that must be addressed by regulators instead of just blithely ignored by representatives and their constituents.
2
An interesting article, but I think it makes a pretty big leap in its conclusions. On Love Island the contestants are constantly directed on what to do by a voice through speakers on site, including on what to stop talking about if things get boring, for example, and the 'directors' need specific footage for the narrative they are creating, additionally the cameras are not all hidden, so there are also camera operators on the site. As a result I think it's a leap to compare this to the development of a real surveillance state, where the goal is, like the panopticon, to never actually let the watched know they are being watched, while at the same time letting them know they could be being watched at any time.
24
Right now we are 'surveilled' primarily to target advertising. Most people think they have nothing to hide, and that is assuming they are even aware of the level of data aggregation and surveillance in the first place. My best guess about why people accept this because these companies can't put us in jail or convict us of a crime.
It is foolish to assume that tech companies will always be private stewards of our data and not appendages of our security services. Defense contracting is surely more lucrative than maximizing clicks.
Doesn't anyone remember what happened after 9/11 with the Patriot Act? AT&T didn't push back when the government demanded data. Why is it so hard for so many of us to imagine a scenario where a terrifying existential crisis leads to the use of our data to target us for political speech or affiliation? It's already been proven to work brilliantly for advertising and making addictive products.
7
This is a very good analysis, but in fact, the culture of surveillance has been a key motif of reality television at least since MTV's Real World, and certainly prevalent since Big Brother (the show, not the Orwell). The competition trope comes directly from game shows, as a means of driving the quasi-narrative.
3
Love Island, the British version, has probably around 30 or so people cycle in and out over the course of a season, some staying the whole time, others staying only a night or two. I believe there have been three people now who have been on the program and then committed suicide after the season ends. It is hard to say if the program specifically attracts or selects contestants with mental diseases, or if the shock of the real world and becoming a celebrity so quickly causes the illness. Regardless, in my mind, it is scary, and reckless, and I hope the US version learns the lesson from the British, that support is needed post-production for these young adults.
12
"Reality shows" deserve air quotes. A true reality show would include people with illness, sometimes fatal ones, economic worry, some hunger, unsatisfying jobs and unrewarding relationships among the snippets of happiness we all get to see from time to time.
Love Island, Big Brother and most of the others in this genre turn us into zombies and are more out of Rod Serling's world than one with great literature and a point to make.
38
@Douglas McNeill Rod Serling had many important points to make.
8
@Douglas McNeill
And not everyone would be "beautiful people."
1
I’ve never owned a television & I haven’t watched a TV program since childhood, about 50 years ago. I’m aware of “reality shows” but I’ve never seen one.
Can anyone explain to me why this show might be appealing to viewers? Are viewers envious of the participants, or contemptuous? Does it matter how natural or how artificial the participants are? Is it the competitive aspect that holds the viewers’ interest, or prurience, or something else?
14
@Martin I think it's appealing to different people for different reasons--all the reasons you articulated in your comment and more. Some people like the escapism of watching people living in well-appointed luxury, others like seeing how relationships between strangers develop and disintegrate, others are attracted by the prurience (which is clearly part of the marketing), others like it the way they'd enjoy watching a game of chess--and want to see which contestants treat it like a game versus take the love-seeking aspect seriously. In some ways, I think reality TV has filled a vacuum left by the realities of modern life: feelings of isolation due to long work-hours, constantly moving from city to city or home to home, and keeping in touch with friends and family through social media rather than real life.
9
@Martin Love Island offers the unique opportunity to watch other people's relationships develop and fall apart from a quasi-bird's eye view. The show is as vapid and inane as it is fascinating. In any given episode, almost nothing will happen, but what will happen will create discussion, much in the same two of your friends going through a messy breakup would create discussion.
1
Ever gawk at a terrible auto accident or a furious police action? Same thing. For some reason, we can’t help but be absorbed by such scenes, even place themselves in them. “There but for the grace of ....” In the case of “Love Island” and its ilk, the gawking fixation is probably more akin to examining freshly deposited contents in the toilet, there to stare at, ponder, compare, feel relief from, perhaps be revolted by, but then with a mere flick of the wrist, it’s gone, out of sight out of mind. Our minds behave in grotesque ways sometimes. We’ll understand some day.
6
I wonder if the point should be less about privacy and more about selfish, mean-spirited, win at any cost behavior. The coliseum of television is shaping the morality of our times...consider the reality TV Star president.
109
Love Island is an exemplar of how people are willing to debase and humiliate themselves for the chance at a sliver of fame. The fact that they completely surrender their privacy is almost an afterthought to the fact they forever surrender their dignity. And as an added bonus, every person they ever love, and eventually their own children (assuming they eventually have any), get to see their debasement over and over again, because it lives forever on the internet.
But hey—they were famous for a couple of weeks, so I guess it was all worth it.
123
@Jack Sonville
famous for the people who saw the show and could keep from confusing the contestants. To everyone else in the world, complete unknown
3
@Jack Sonville
My big question is why would anybody watch this mind numbing garbage? I have never watched a single reality show in my 60 years on earth, including "America's Got Talent" even when my cousin performed in the top twelve a few years back. Not much of a tv watcher although I do watch movies. I love to read and listen to music along with crafting and gardening. Life is far too short wasting hours watching contrived junk like this. It says far more about the lack of intellect in both countries and why both of our governments are failing. I guess the "apple" doesn't fall far from the tree.
2
@Jack Sonville
It was I believe the great wit Oscar Wilde who said; " There is only one thing worse than being talked about and that is not being talked about". Oscar Wilde never got to be old he died a very very miserable and angry young man.
I am told we have the same TV show in Quebec where the only difference is no swimsuits. I am also told sex is not as popular as it once was and after a couple of minutes everyone looks the same naked.
1
Residents' desire for safety and crime prevention empowers the extension of the surveillance state. After initial capabilities are implemented the "no problem if you've got nothing to hide" argument is used to extend the range and detail of the surveillance state's powers. Realisation that even beefed-up surveillance can not prevent terrorist acts, random shootings, home burglaries and sexual assaults allows the security apparatus to deploy technological advances such as face recognition and data capabilities to match real-time surveillance against government-held datasets, financial records, telecommunications and digital footprints.
Bingo! Personal freedom is not just curtailed but actually abolished.
I live in such a state. It is literally no safer than it was the day before, or the decade before, CCTV monitoring began its journey to ubiquity. But we have given up personal freedom to a blundering behemoth that we also have to pay for and the costs of which have caused the precipitate decline in resources for traditional reactive human-based policing.
It's our own fault, but will anyone now have the courage to suggest that we should dismantle the surveillance state and invest in encouraging personal responsibility once more?
50
Interesting stuff, but I think the best thing I've seen in this decades-old genre is "Dead Set". You can find it on Netflix today, the concept is the set of Big Brother, but the zombie apocalypse breaks out. It's post "28 Days Later" zombies that run at full speed, and it's pretty gory. Pretty much the same conclusion as here, what is constant surveillance doing to society, but with the added question, how does it help us during the zombie apocalypse?
Anyway the premise of the article is wrong, it is still easy to escape surveillance, even today. Consider this, I live in the heart of one of the more heavily surveilled areas in America, NYC. Starting from my home, I leave my phone at home (or take out the battery), get on the subway, get off at Columbus Circle, and walk into Central Park. Tada, no eyes on me, nothing that can identify me, and from there I just catch a taxi to a Metro North station and I'm gone, paying in cash.
But you won't catch me going on Love Island, I don't think love can be found in such an artificial setting.
6
My NYC brother,
If you think for one minute that you get on the subway and get off at Columbus Circle and have escaped surveillance you have to be joking! I bet you are seen by at least, at a minimum, fifty cameras on that route. Did you mean something else when you said you escaped surveillance?
7
You've touched a very key point. There is no "outside" to return to. The drama of Patrick McGoohan's "The Prisoner" is a big story arc of a person who resigned a secretive job and becomes a resident of "The Village" where the goal is to break you in one way or another, constant surveillance being a necessary part of the life there. It's his character's struggle to survive and get back to the outside that drives the show. But does he, in the end? That would be telling. And once this surveillance state in our real world gets fully established, can it ever be turned off? Or is it become an addiction making the worst of the pharmaceuticals look pale in comparison?
Be seeing you.
42
@Patrick
McGoohan didn't just "become" a resident of the Village. He was knocked out with gas, and transported there. When he woke up, he found he had been assigned a number (Six) and that he couldn't leave. I'll never forget the wonderful line,
"I am not a number. I am a free man!"
32
@Patrick
One thing we learned from "The Prisoner", is how willing most people are to go along with the "conditions of their imprisonment", particularly if they are rewarded in some way. It's only when the rewards fail or falter that the chance for rebellion arises. Number Six knew he was being watched and used that fact to undermine his captors, but most prisoners would adapt their behavior and eventually internalize it completely.
In the great 1932 film "I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang ", the prisoners must adopt an exaggerated gait in order to walk with their shackles. There is a telling scene where an inmate Barney has been released, and is leaving the compound dressed in his civies. As he walks out, waving to the other prisoners, he automatically lifts his legs as if the chains are still around his ankles, although they're now gone.
9
@Patrick The Prisoner was the sequel to the show “Secret Agent” that had the great song “Secret Agent Man” by Johnny Rivers as the theme song. Both great shows that haven’t been aired in quite a while.
3