You will hear part of a discussion between Simon, a TV critic, and Eve, a former reality TV contestant, about reality TV. For questions 1-5, choose the answers (A, B, C or D) which fits best according to what you hear.
1. When reality TV started, Simon
A realised how important it was going to be.
B took an immediate dislike to it.
C could not understand what all the fuss was about.
D did not believe it would be so popular.
2. Simon's overall attitude to reality TV is
A disgust at the standard of the content.
B disbelief that anyone could watch it.
C anger at the companies that broadcast it.
D contempt for fame-seeking participants.
3. Why does Eve say that her experience of reality TV was realistic?
A The action was shown exactly as it happened.
B Participants had not learned lines from a script.
C People are often humiliated in real life.
D The environment was entirely natural.
4. What does Simon believe contributed most to the fall in popularity of reality TV?
A There are no longer talented people producing it.
B The public are bored with the format.
C It has been superseded by the Internet.
D Viewers want more quality content.
5. What do both speakers agree about?
A Not all reality TV is in bad taste.
B Instant celebrity is a worthwhile goal.
C Fame can be harmful to children.
D Reality TV is harmless entertainment.
KEY
1. D
2. A
3. B
4. C
5. C
Vocabulary
supersede: /ˌsuːpəˈsiːd/ to take the place of something/somebody that is considered to be old-fashioned or no longer the best available
- be superseded (by something) The theory has been superseded by more recent research.
Sp. reemplazar, substituir.
thorny: [usually before noun] causing difficulty or disagreement. Synonym: knotty. Sp. controvertido
- There are still some thorny questions to be answered.
- They must tackle the thorny issue of refugees to negotiate a final settlement.
- It's an elegant solution to a thorny problem.
- Winner: Kay Hall. Runner-up: Chris Platts.
- They finished runners-up behind Sweden.
- The runners-up will all receive a £50 prize.
Sp. segundo, finalista.
drop something to stop doing or discussing something; to not continue with something
- I dropped German (= stopped studying it) when I was 14.
- Drop everything and come at once!
- Look, can we just drop it (= stop talking about it)?
- I think we'd better drop the subject.
- The police decided to drop the charges against her.
- Let's drop the formalities—please call me Mike.
- (informal) to start
- What time shall we kick off?
- And then it all kicked off.
- Tom will kick off with a few comments.
- She's dead. I can't get my head round it yet
- (disapproving) to make something less accurate or educational, and of worse quality, by trying to make it easier for people to understand
- The BBC denies that its broadcasting has been dumbed down.
Sp. bajar el nivel
bent on (doing) something:
- determined to do something (usually something bad)
- She seems bent on making life difficult for me.
- to be bent on destruction/revenge
- He's your typical supervillain, bent on world domination.
Sp. decidido, empeñado.
hell-bent on something/on doing something determined to do something even though the results may be bad
- He seems hell-bent on drinking himself to death.
- Sometimes small firms can outdo big business when it comes to customer care.
- Not to be outdone (= not wanting to let somebody else do better), she tried again.
- The brothers tried to outdo each other in everything.
Sp. superar.
the lowest common denominator: something that is simple
enough to seem interesting to, or to be understood by, the highest
number of people in a particular group; the sort of people who are least
intelligent or accept something that is of low quality.
The biggest possible number of people, including people who are very easily influenced or are willing to accept low standards E.g. Television quiz shows often seem to target the lowest common denominator.
Used
to refer in a disapproving way to the sort of people in society who are
least intelligent and who will accept low-quality products and
entertainment: E.g. The problem with so much television is that it is
aimed at the lowest common denominator
Sp. mínimo común denominador.
- The school syllabus seems aimed at the lowest common denominator.
- ‘Villa’ was something of a misnomer—the place was no more than an old farmhouse.
Sp. nombre equivocado
compelling: that makes you pay attention to it because it is so interesting and exciting
- Her latest book makes compelling reading.
- His eyes were strangely compelling.
Sp. emocionante, absorbente, cautivador
shrewd:clever at understanding and making judgements about a situation. Sp. listo, astuto, inteligente.
(informal) including all the bad or unpleasant features of somebody/something. Sp. con todos sus defectos. E.g. The documentary shows the life of a fashion model, warts and all.
She still loves him, warts and all.
to gradually disappear or stop
- The effects of the drug will soon wear off.
- The novelty of married life was beginning to wear off
- crave (for) something She has always craved excitement.
- to crave alcohol/drugs/sweet food/carbohydrates/cigarettes/coffee
- crave to do something They craved to return to their homeland.
- You can stream the song for a single listen.
- The programme was streamed on the Web 24 hours a day.
- The show has gone up in the ratings.
- The BBC is currently ahead in the ratings war.
- a pushy salesman
- Her parents were never pushy although they encouraged her acting ambitions from an early age.
- He did an impression of Tom Hanks.
- She did her Marilyn Monroe impression.
on-demand: able to be watched at any time: Most people in this region do not even have television, let alone on-demand movies. Sp. a la carta.
be on your/its last legs
to be going to die or stop functioning very soon; to be very weak or in bad condition. E.g. The car’s on its last legs.
Interviewer: To discuss the thorny topic of reality TV today, it’s great to welcome Simon, a TV critic, and Eve, who you may remember as a contestant in Survival; the fifth series, was it?
Eve: That’s right, I was runner-up, but just glad I survived!
Interviewer: That series has since been dropped, I wonder, Simon, do you think the end has finally come for reality TV?
Simon: Well, I for one wouldn’t be sad to see it go. You know, when it first really took off – I suppose we could say Big Brother kicked it off back in 2000 in this country – back then there was a huge debate about it in the media. I remember journalists predicting reality TV as the future of television and not quite being able to get my head round that. Oh, but sure enough, they were proved right as the format just continued to develop and pretty soon most of TV was reality TV. With hindsight, I’m afraid it really marked the start of the dumbing down of television programmes, a process which has continued to this day. Every reality show seems bent on outdoing the one before with even more humiliation and exploitation of sad losers who just want their fifteen minutes of fame. The genre really plays to the lowest common denominator when it comes to viewers, and it has turned into a kind of reality/soap opera mix in recent years.
Interviewer: Yes, a lot of critics say that ‘reality’ is a misnomer, because although these shows are unscripted, the reality they show is directed and edited in such a way as to make it more compelling. What is your experience of that, Eve?
Eve: Well, of course, when the cameras are filming 24/7, you’re not going to see everything, and a lot of footage is cut. And you can’t say that a bunch of people being stuck on a desert island for a TV show is very realistic. Of course they choose to show the dramatic scenes, and every film student knows that the story depends on shrewd editing, but we were not acting in any sense of the word and we were not told what to say!
Interviewer: Didn’t you feel a bit humiliated though, by some of the challenges? The bug-eating one comes to mind, I mean, is it right to film people making fools of themselves?
Eve: No, I didn’t find that humiliating, it was just part of the format and showed contestants’ ability to survive. I think it’s good for viewers to see a warts-and-all portrayal of this kind of environment, you know some of us looked quite rough towards the end. That was real, you know, whereas, before people might have thought that living on a desert island was, well, something idyllic. Surviving on an island without any luxuries is really tough. I felt I had achieved something.
Simon: Yes, but it’s not just you and your team and a couple of tents, is it? There’s a whole camera crew and production team, you name it.
Eve: Well, obviously, otherwise how are they going to film? But really, it’s tough. It’s dangerous. Don’t you remember a couple of contestants had to be airlifted to hospital because they got very sick?
Simon: Exactly what I’m talking about, putting people in danger for the entertainment of the masses, it’s not that different from the gladiators in ancient Rome, except today health and safety measures mean no-one should actually risk their lives.
Eve: But people in those situations, they’re not acting, you know, and I think that’s what appeals to audiences.
Simon: Oh come on, they are acting. Not from a script maybe, but playing to the cameras. It’s clear that a lot of the contestants are playing a kind of role, often encouraged to do so by the producers.
Eve: Well, the situations are deliberately dramatic; I mean no-one wants to watch a bunch of people sitting around and all getting along!
Interviewer: Why do you think these shows are finally falling out of favour? Is it just that the novelty has worn off?
Simon: Well, I suppose that’s partly the reason. I mean, it seems that the endless variations of the formula have now been exhausted. Also, I think the instant celebrity that some of these shows’ contestants crave is now better served by the Internet. A lot of reality shows paved the way for the kind of vlogs you see today, and then there is even an app, I believe, that lets you stream your life live from your mobile, so really anyone can be famous today.
Eve: Yes, but what if that’s what the public wants? The ratings used to be phenomenal for these shows, they were often the most watched shows and their franchises were global. There’s something that appeals to a whole lot of people.
Simon: The problem is though, Eve, is that the viewers often had no choice. When there wasn’t much else on the television, they either watched or turned off. Now let’s hope we can get back to some proper programming. I’d like to see more of the quality dramas and documentaries that have been squeezed out of prime-time television for over a decade.
Interviewer: Eve, are there any aspects of reality television that you don’t like?
Eve: Well, I’m not keen on the shows that involve children, you know the dancing or singing competitions. I think there is always a pushy parent behind these kids, hoping their child will be famous. I mean, it’s one thing to fail in front of a small audience, but to get something wrong in front of an audience of millions, that’s a huge blow for a small child to take. Also I don’t like watching ten-year-olds doing pop star impressions, however good their voices may be, I think it’s just cringeworthy.
Simon: Well the whole question of children and fame is a tricky one, even before reality TV, there was a problem with that. I have to say that my main objection to the whole reality TV thing is that it is just lazy. It really doesn’t require much talent or imagination to put together, and requires even less thought from its viewers. It feeds the belief that, because viewers see people, just like them on the shows, they too could be famous without achieving anything! Whatever the future of reality shows, I’m afraid they have hastened the demise of television as we know it. Writers have moved into creating series for streaming companies, so now if you want quality television, all you have to do is subscribe to on-demand packages. All the talent has disappeared from television, which, like a lot of old media, is on its last legs!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.