How Real are Reality Shows?

Sabaa at # 9:

I apologize for this delayed response to your post as I am posting from my work, which makes me guilty :-)

Having followed the debates since 2003, I am of slightly different opinion. I think that Democrats will get involved with Iraq from a more pluralistic perspective i.e. by presenting a case for continued efforts for democracy and for stopping a civil war. Thus, they would like to bring many other European countries to their fold. Ditto in Afghanistan.

Keeping the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan is to the advantage of the world in general and to Muslim countries in particular, otherwise both these countries would be in civil war, destabilizing many countries in their immediate neighborhoods.

Another reason why I see that Democrats would like to expose Republicans on War on Terror is their deep rooted enmity towards current republican leadership. Howard Dean and others have public called Bush and his administration scoundrels.

In my opinion, by bringing the world to their fold for a genuine reason of upholding democratic values and by exposing the lies of neo-cons, Democrats would like to ensure a fairly long tenure in the White House, and mind you, I repeat, the reasons would be genuine this time.

As regards, Democrats position on Israel, I believe that Palestinian should get into negotiations and Muslim countries should go ahead and recognize Israel. Having read many papers written by Israelis and having heard personal experiences of many Muslim diplomats visiting Israel on non official visits, I have total faith in their seriousness and honesty for seeking peace with Palestinians.

However, I will again go back to my original prediction that neo-cons would at this time be planning a new episode of the reality show to push their popularity upwards.

ahmadzai, interesting thoughts. Although democrats and republicans differ with respect to domestic policies, I don`t think there will be a great deal of difference in their foreign policies. Many muslims in the US voted for Bush against Kerry, thinking that he would have a more positive role in the Middle East, but we know now that their efforts were futile. Hillary Clinton for example intends to send 90,000 more troops to Iraq, thinks withdrawal will be disastrous for USA, supports tougher actions against Iran, and her support for Israel`s apartheid wall so enraged Human Rights Watch that it broke from its usual policy of discreet silence and sent a letter of protest: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/23/isrlpa12086_txt.htm

Sabaa Ali:

At the cost of repitition, my predictions:

1. As the popularity of Bush continues to erode, the neo-cons will concoct every reason in the world to attack Iran to get the support of an average non-thinking American back. Alternatively, we will hear from OBL threatening to wipe off America from the face of the world or even face a series of bomb explosions in an attempt to win the American masses back to the agenda of the neo-cons. In an interview to Howard Dean, the CNN asked him if Democrats believe that in the last elections (2004), the anti-USA message of OBL at the last minute turned the tides in favor of Republicans. Howard responded that Democrats will not like to comment on that particular incident, but they will concentrate on future strategies. I had earlier thought that Howard should have said that the message did in fact turned the tides and it was odd that OBL spoke at that critical time. But then, Howard is much more knowledgeable about the ways to carry himself. He must have done what is prudent. In any case, he played smart, because CNN had already suggested to the audience, what he might have intended to say.

2. If at all Democrats come into power in 2008, have it in writing that 9/11, the subsequent War on Terror, attack on Iraq and perhaps on Iran will be exposed as the biggest reality shows that were ever organized. As it is, many people in the West are already questioning the authenticity of 9/11. Read this one for instance:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/200306charliesheen.htm

Thank you all for your comments, encouraging and otherwise.


ahmadzai, I agree about the war on terror. It is indeed just another reality show to millions of people around the world. What they don`t realise is though, is that it`s chopped and clipped to suit an agenda just as much as other reality shows.


ed, there`s not much in the media today that truly `tells it like it is`.


malik99, doesn`t it remind you of roman gladiators and how that was all a show put on for entertainment?

Embedded journalism is very much a one-sided story-telling affair.

This is an excellent article.

In addition to Iraq, I would like to add War on Terror (which means pressurising Muslim countries to `do more` on neo-cons agenda) as one more reality show.

I am afraid that with sagging popularity of Bush, either OBL is about to issue a new threat to western society or another series of bomb blast is about to occur for Bush`s redemption.

the article was disconnected not as informative as anticipated after eading the title...seems like a television guide on what to watch ....the iraq war is forced in among a list of american TV crap....

what is this article supposed to be about? FV Dahling..a little help here on chanda`s 7th grade home-ec paper. Is this supposed to be informative; enlightening even? What`s next an article on rubber, different kinds of rubber and how rubber is stretchy?

Most people know what they are watching and why they are watching. There is no grand conspiracy to hoodwink the public. Only a halfwit will try to draw some parallel between ``The Osbournes`` and ``Operation Kill the Sunni Terrorist Bastards in Ramadi``. And I am assuming this article is Chowk`s way to accomodate even the..how do we say...``mini-school bus riders``` literary ambitions.

I just recalled something, the diversion of reality shows from ``reality`` is not wihout causes. These causes may range from ``wider national interest`` to other more henious ideas. Amongst these, commercialism commands a high position.

Any discussion on reality shows and their relationship with ``reality`` and ``commercialism`` might not be complete without mentioning ``The Truman Show`` (starring Jim Carey).

Softer and shorter versions of commercialised reality shows are avaiable in the form of numerous ditergent and cleaner ads that we see with fat houseladies claiming that their filthy toilet WC has been miraculously transformed into a glitering piece of china / procelain which is fit enough to serve soup in !!! ... and all because they used xyzxyzxyz brand of cleaner !!! ..... who knows ... maybe these ads are showing the reality !!! (Ms. Sania Saeed would know !!!)

The classification of War Coverage as a reality show reminds me of a movie I once watched, and would like to recommend to all students of media and journalism. The movie was none other than ``Wag the Dog``.

The movie goes one step ahead of reality show style war coverage, it is about a war which is actually ``produced`` for public consumption.

We sure live in some weird times. Art imitates life and vice versa. In the end it all appears to be one big interconnected illusion.

Nice try at writing on a subject which requires a lot of detail.

``‘Embedded Journalism’, a new reporting technique has been in practice which shows the reporters stationed in the field``

Your categorization of this kind of journalism as a ``reality show`` is apt. In fact, the whole war is packaged as a reality show for american viewers who sit on couches, munching chips, and cheering on. War is a cost free venture for those who do not have sons and daughters in the field.

As for embedded journalism, it is kind of hard to be objective when your personal safety is dependent on the soldiers you are accompanying. The counterparts of these military embedded journalists are those who are embedded in the civilian populations. Since they are able to report on what the military embedded journalists could not - that is the killings of the civilians, they get targetted as al-jazeerah`s reporters found out the hard way.