Essay About Talk Show Program And Talk Shows

The Televised Cult
Essay Preview: The Televised Cult
Report this essay
The Televised Cult        Most people like to watch a talk show program on television and judge each issue accordingly. Others like to be entertained or simply relate to the people on the screen. Whichever category we fall under, we all sit in to hear and watch the troubles and conflicts that these talk shows involve us in. Two professionals in which will be introduced in this essay share their personal reflections on how people are being affected by this type of media. I will review Heaton and Wilson’s arguments and evaluate their evidence in order to analyze whether or not it is credible, relevant, or sufficient.         Psychologist Jeanne Heaton and Educational advisor Nona Wilson’s main claim in their article “Talk TV: Tuning in to Trouble” is that viewers of modern talk show programs are creating more problems for themselves by participating in what’s believed to be entertainment instead of pure animosity and hate. For Example, the authors compare current Talk TV to old gruesome gladiator fights held in the Colosseum. The educators’ state, “while the show is less bloody, the crowd is bigger than ever and is roaring for more” (153). Heaton and Wilson use a reflective and critical tone as they highlight the mass growing amount of viewers rapidly partaking in destructive televised media. They support this claim by comparing old Talk TV shows that practiced high quality television to modern programs that created more problems to viewers by distorting normal issues for audience entertainment. The writers provide a reference made by Naomi Wolf, the authors of The Beauty Myth, as she explains the contributing factors made by Phil Donahue and Oprah Winfrey: ‘“ [Talk Shows did] something absolutely unique among our cultural institutions: that is, they treat[ed] the opinions of women of all classes, races, and educational levels as if they mattered”’ (154). However, modern Talk TV has taken popularity due to fan ratings. The writers go on to state that “producers claim viewers want shows to sizzle” (155), and that “the primary focus of Talk TV has always been to entertain and to do so by using sexual, familial, and personal problems” (155). Heaton and Wilson’s purpose in writing this article is to inform and convince the readers that not only are the guest in a show are being exploited in a bad mental environment, but the viewers that participate in it. The authors use a concerned tone throughout their article intended for all the beclouded victims participating in the televised issue.

These authors share expert opinions without proper credible sources. Despite their credentials they can make knowledgeable assertions and bring about answers to their own ideas, but they fail to support their claims by using persuasive information. In fact, the authors use notions like “seems that viewers only want to see and hear about problems” (153), or “perhaps intending only to be entertained” (155). These remarks do not fortify the authors’ credibility, especially after not incorporating any solid evidence or statistical data that would support their affirmations. Regardless of the authors’ credentials, opinions and statements need to be accounted with hard evidence. This is important to the readers in that they need hard evidence to compare an audience to another group of people. Readers need to know if televised programs are truly affecting crowds.          Heaton and Wilson provide several examples and comparisons that were relevant to their proposal. For example, Even though I think comparing a Talk TV audience to spectators at a Colosseum from A.D. 80 was over the top, it was a great opener and attention getter for the readers. The authors share some history quoting, “Gladiators fought to the death with these wild beasts and with one another. Christians, a disposable minority, were thrown to lions for entertainment” (153), an audience usually jeers and taunts guest or victims, but not to the point of wishing death upon them. Society is completely different to the Roman Empire Era; however, the readers grasp the idea the author is trying to portray. Another form of relevant data was the comparison of Oprah and Phil’s show to the popular modern programs. The authors thank Winfrey and Donahue, “Enormous Credit for providing a platform for the voices of so many who needed to be heard belongs to these two host”(154). These two hosts apparently did what other shows didn’t, that is provided an ear, assure assistance, and arrange a solution for those that felt unheard. Heaton and Wilson show the evolution of Talk TV when they turn to modern shows disguising common problems with more intriguing topics. For instance, modern shows “…often covered what sound like common problems with work, love and sex”(155) Heaton and Wilson share how, “Common problems such as depression and anxiety are rarely presented, yet these disorders affect millions”(156). However, these popular TV shows rather talk about more interesting topics that will hype up a crowd and keep them entertained.