http://www.vulture.com/2015/09/reality-tv-boom-days-are-over.html

Survivor ushered in the reality television boom in summer of 2000 with 52 million watching the first season’s finale. But nowadays, the reality TV fatigue has set in. “Reality seems tired. It seems derivative,” a former network chief who now works in the digital world tells Vulture. “There hasn’t been a really loud, innovative reality show in a while.”

Maybe if the networks didnt shove reality tv down our throats maybe it would be still thriving. I think I watched about 2% of all reality tv.

Maybe if the networks didnt shove reality tv down our throats maybe it would be still thriving. I think I watched about 2% of all reality tv.
2% more than I did. lol

I don't know about other reality TV shows, but 15 years later I'm still quite the Survivor fan. ;)

American Idol is gone next year.

http://variety.com/2015/tv/spotlight/reality-tv-the-bachelor-american-ninja-warrior-the-voice-1201604040/

Despite the failure to create exciting new reality shows, longstanding shows like Survivor and The Bachelor are still thriving.

I'm glad this genre is dying!

For awhile, there was the western genre of the 50's and 60's, the variety/sketch comedy genre of the 70's and they died-out without a revival...but unlike the reality genre...those shows had quality. Reality shows only had quantity!

Wait Until the late 2010's and early 2020's.
when it makes a comeback.

Our national nightmare won't be over until the Kardashians are cancelled.

^^^
That. I make a point of separating reality shows like Survivor versus Kardashians. Shows like Survivor to me are game shows where there are contests and a winner. A show like Kardashians makes non talented people stars. I have a problem with calling people like them stars because to me they are trash. I actually don't even watch Survivor, just making a point.

This Song's for YOU! :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g_0-leBhME (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g_0-leBhME)

To be honest, I never really had any problem with the Kardashians. Yeah, there rich but what do you expect. There father was Robert Kardashian who defended OJ. I mean that trial was huge. There is no way that the Kardashians wouldnt be rich just on that alone. And yes, you could point to Kim's sex tape but Pamela Anderson made one too and we dont villify her for that. Plus, the fact it was ions ago and Kim and Ray J were consenting adults.

I dont understand the hatred for them because what do they do that's so terrible. Do they drink and drive? Have they murdered people? Do they smoke hard drugs and drink hard? Have they blown all there money? I think there more reliable to do something as opposed to a Lindsay Lohan or Miley Cyrus. If one (Lohan) isnt going to jail or late to auditions and whatnot, you got Cyrus who sticks her tongue out and grinds every 2 seconds. We get it, your mature. You want to shed the Hannah Montana image but not by shaking your ass every two seconds.

To be honest, I never really had any problem with the Kardashians. Yeah, there rich but what do you expect. There father was Robert Kardashian who defended OJ. I mean that trial was huge. There is no way that the Kardashians wouldnt be rich just on that alone. And yes, you could point to Kim's sex tape but Pamela Anderson made one too and we dont villify her for that. Plus, the fact it was ions ago and Kim and Ray J were consenting adults.

I dont understand the hatred for them because what do they do that's so terrible. Do they drink and drive? Have they murdered people? Do they smoke hard drugs and drink hard? Have they blown all there money? I think there more reliable to do something as opposed to a Lindsay Lohan or Miley Cyrus. If one (Lohan) isnt going to jail or late to auditions and whatnot, you got Cyrus who sticks her tongue out and grinds every 2 seconds. We get it, your mature. You want to shed the Hannah Montana image but not by shaking your ass every two seconds.


Because they are talentless put into the category of celebrities. Yes, the sex tape did put her in the spotlight but if that is the only reason what does that say? Pamela Anderson was an actress, maybe not the most talented one, but she was on television and movies. Kim Kardashian was a nobody. Her father was famous for being OJ lawyer but that's him. Think about it, we as a society have put people who did nothing into the spotlight and made them stars. It's not just them, but Honey Boo, the Teen Moms, the Duggars and all the others. Where do we draw the line? If a sister of a serial killer wants it, should she get a reality show? How about a woman making babies illegitimately so she can get welfare? There's the problem. Meanwhile I know lots of people who worked in television and movies who can't find jobs. Is it fair they are unemployed while many freaks aren't?

I disagree about your Kardashian take but agree with everything else. I think their's a difference between inheriting money(The Kardashians, Paris Hilton) as opposed to getting rich with no talent. I know you said Robert was the guy not Kim that made the money but still. The Kardashians, as a group, come from money. The whole family, like Paris Hilton's is privledged. So, should we hold people who come from money in lower regard? To me, what are you going to do? They have money, there kids have money and there kids will have money.

The teen moms and Honey BooBoo probably had nothing and instead of working for it, they figure they'll cash in on the reality tv craze.

I disagree about your Kardashian take but agree with everything else. I think their's a difference between inheriting money(The Kardashians, Paris Hilton) as opposed to getting rich with no talent. I know you said Robert was the guy not Kim that made the money but still. The Kardashians, as a group, come from money. The whole family, like Paris Hilton's is privledged. So, should we hold people who come from money in lower regard? To me, what are you going to do? They have money, there kids have money and there kids will have money.

The teen moms and Honey BooBoo probably had nothing and instead of working for it, they figure they'll cash in on the reality tv craze.

But even if they inherited money doesn't mean they should be held up as classy people. There are lots of people who came from money who work hard. For example, did you know Julia Louis-Dreyfuss came from wealth? her dad is a billionaire and one of the richest men in the world. Yet she worked hard to become a successful actress. She could have gotten a reality show or been like the others but didn't do that. The Kardashians are not a family to glorify.

By the way, it's "their kids have money". So what if they come from money, why not work with that? Do you see Bill Gates kids having a reality show? I doubt they would.

And yes, you could point to Kim's sex tape but Pamela Anderson made one too and we dont villify her for that.

Two wrongs don't make a right. It's a cliché, but it is true.

I don't get my morals from television so I don't care what the Kardashians do or don't do because their decisions don't effect me. I do get some of my entertainment from television and I don't find them entertaining. But hey, it's a free country and we can all vote with our remote controls.

Also, we don't vilify Pamela Anderson because that's part of her reputation, as a sexy model/actress. She's also not held up as a role model and I never hear girls saying they want to be Pamela Anderson. Not to mention Anderson was MARRIED when making the tape. Personally, I'd rather a daughter look at her versus Kim Kardashian because Pamela Anderson does a lot for animals, the other one doesn't.

Maybe if the networks didnt shove reality tv down our throats maybe it would be still thriving. I think I watched about 2% of all reality tv.Yes the worst trash ever on TV!!

I guess to me the Kardashians never bothered me. But again, to each his own. I'm sure there's a lot of reality stars and shows that I like that you dont like and vice versa.