Read Aloud the Text Content

This audio was created by Woord's Text to Speech service by content creators from all around the world.

Text Content or SSML code:

Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Chapter Three Portrayals of Rural People and Places in Reality Television Programming How Popular American Cable Series Misrepresent Rural Realities Karl A. Jicha Since the early 1990s, reality television shows have enjoyed widespread popularity among American audiences. Covering a broad assortment of sub- ject matter and depicting people encountering an even wider variety of "real- life" situations, reality shows have become a proven commodity, generating a windfall for the networks as they are generally low-budget, unscripted (for the most part), and rely on a relatively unknown cast who generally are not professional actors, as noted by Jonsson (2014): As a new television season kicks off, series about strange subcultures of sur- vivalists or blue-collar families, many of them with Spanish moss beards and grins that need some dental work, appear at almost every click of the remote. Enjoying its unexpected rise among the top popular television genres, and firmly embedding itself in American popular culture, reality television has quickly evolved into a number of different subgenres (Haynes, 2014). Among the latest and most popular of these is the growing number of shows with rural-based themes that delve into the occupations, lifestyles, and even life-or-death struggles with the environment of rural Americans. Broadly referred to as part of a “cultural tourism” subgenre that documents the lives and activities of rural Americans, these series are more commonly referred to as "rural reality” television. Despite their popularity, many scholars and tele- vision critics have classified this subgenre of reality television as “redneck 35 Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. 52 52 Chapter 3 ture, largely informed by broadcast media, helps to create and reinforce popular misconceptions that are legitimated by an urbanormative ideology that anything urban is normal and anything outside of that is marginalized (Fulkerson and Thomas, 2013). Television and the film industry have long played a key role in stereotyp- ing people in rural areas of the United States as “ignorant and uncouth hillbillies" (DeKeseredy, Muzzatti, and Donnermeyer, 2014, p. 179). Simi- larly, they tend to portray rural areas as far removed from the urban world and scenic, yet forbidding places fraught with danger. Rural reality shows still depict the landscape as wild and full of potential natural threats around every corner. One notable change is that rural reality series do not focus exclusively on the rural South. Shows cover a wide range of geographic regions spanning seemingly every state. With regards to rural people, the steady stream of rural reality shows on cable television over the past decade appears to have done little to alleviate persistent stereotypes. One critical change is that most shows have, for the most part, steered clear of vilifying rural residents who live in the swamps and mountains as demented and in-bred murderers and rapists. In cases where bizarre and unpredictable characters do emerge, they are usually pitted against the more mild-mannered and slightly less unpredictable main cast members (e.g., Shelby Stanga from Ax Men and Legend of Shelby the Swampman). The people are not as frightening as they have been portrayed in the past, but rarely is any mention made of their receiving an education beyond high school. In cases where educational attainment is brought up, it is usually in the "Rags to Riches” subset of shows and treated as an anomaly among people from rural areas (e.g., the family members from Duck Dynasty who all have college or, in some cases, graduate degrees). While rural reality shows depict their rural cast members as personable, ingenious, and even lovable, they continue to reinforce long-standing stereo- types by ignoring the rich diversity of people, places, occupations, and life- styles that are characteristic of twenty-first century rural America. Further- more, they continue to promote the idea that there is a sharp rural-urban dichotomy and that most rural Americans live as they did in the distant past. These misrepresentations are not obvious to most, but are damaging nonethe- less as they are viewed by critics as exploitative and damaging to rural communities. To be fair, a good number of rural reality shows do provide favorable images of rural people. These typically are from among the large pool of “Dangerous and Dirty Jobs” and “Rural Law Enforcement” subgroups. The focus of many of these series is on the nature of the occupation and the experiences of the brave men, and occasionally women, who engage in them. However, most rural reality shows still project images and portrayals of people and places that fit predictable and stereotypical molds. This is particu- Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. Portrayals of Rural People and Places in Reality Television Programming 53 larly problematic as television is an extremely powerful source of informa- tion and agent of socialization found in virtually every household (Buchanan, 2014; DeKeseredy, Muzzatti, and Donnermeyer, 2014). It serves as one of society's primary modes of disseminating mainstream cultural values and norms. Any misrepresentations of people and their way of life will undoubt- edly leave a lasting image in the minds of most viewers that will shape how they regard others that are different from themselves. Critics contend that mass media and entertainment companies based in metropolitan areas outside of the South are particularly influential in Southern, and rural, popular cul- ture, even more so than are people who actually reside in those locations (Cox, 2011; Hernandez, 2014). It does not help that the majority of viewers are also from urban settings. Aside from the concern that rural reality shows reinforce rural stereo- types, there are other issues that have gone largely unaddressed in the litera- ture. These include the extremely narrow depictions of occupations, gender roles, and the increasing racial and ethnic diversity in rural America. The subgroup of series that focuses specifically on rural occupations portrays them as dangerous, stressful, and adrenaline-pumping jobs that can only be done by the very brave few who have the grit and determination to perform them. They typically require people working together as a team and are most commonly associated with natural resource extraction, public safety, or in- volve interactions with wildlife. All of the jobs are filmed outdoors and in rugged environments that often involve extreme weather conditions. This representation of rural occupations, while exciting and entertaining to watch, is anything but the norm in most rural locations. Similarly to urban America, rural economies have become increasingly diverse, with a decreased depen- dence on agriculture, mining, and manufacturing and an increased depen- dence on service-related occupations (Brown and Schafft, 2011; Flora and Flora, 2013). In fact, over three-quarters of jobs in rural areas today are in services and a substantial number of these are low-skill low-wage positions (Brown and Schafft, 2011). While most service jobs may not make for excit- ing reality television, they are overlooked and even frequently downplayed in rural reality shows. Why would you work in an office if you could be out- doors making a living off the land? Women in twenty-first century rural America continue to face substantial challenges closely related to those they confronted throughout the past (Tick- amyer and Henderson, 2003). While women's roles have changed substan- tially, they continue to face considerable adversity in terms of gaining entry into occupations in nontraditional fields (Lobao and Meyer, 2001) and being underrepresented in stable high-paying occupations (Tickamyer and Hender- son, 2003). Female-headed households with children in nonmetropolitan ar- eas also experience a higher poverty rate in comparison to their metropolitan counterparts (48.42 percent to 39.4 percent in 2014) (USDA-ERS, 2015). Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. 54 Chapter 3 Many rural reality shows reflect the challenges rural women face today in that the gender roles of female cast members tend to be very narrowly de- fined. Most wives on these shows do not work outside of the home and, while they may occasionally assist their husbands on hunts, their primary role is to support their spouses and to serve as the family caregivers. Those that attempt to break from traditional gender roles, such as the female loggers in Ax Men, have to work extra hard to earn the respect of the men they work with. At the same time, they are typically scantily clad and serve minor roles in comparison to the men. While some shows (e.g., Swamp People) do have key female cast members who more than hold their own against men, these are the exception rather than the norm. In addition to the misrepresentations of rural occupations and women, racial and ethnic minorities are nearly completely overlooked in rural reality television. In fact, this segment of the population of rural America is rarely even seen on the screen and their experiences in twenty-first century rural America are all but ignored. A few shows such as Swamp People and those that film in Alaska frequently cover the difficult circumstances faced by American Indian and Alaskan Native cultures. However, in other series, racial and ethnic minorities are practically nonexistent. Given the current social and political climate related to racial inequality, this is a particularly concerning trend. As of the 2010 census, rural areas remain less racially and ethnically diverse than urban areas, as approximately 78 percent of the population are non-Hispanic white, compared to 64 percent of the population in the United States as a whole (HAC, 2012). Despite the fact that rural areas are less racially diverse than urban areas, Brown and Schafft (2011, p. 122) point out that "the minority experience has deep roots in rural America, from the largely rural Black Belt of the Southeast, to the Latino border areas of the Southwest, to the rural American Indian reservation lands.” It is important to note that while the total number of rural African Americans has dropped over the past two decades, Hispanics and Latinos represent the fastest growing segment of the rural population (Lichter and Brown, 2011). The argument here is that the diverse lived experiences of minority populations in rural America deserve more attention and rural reality shows have, by and large, neglected their stories. Perhaps this is a reflection of the fact that the majority of those who view rural reality shows are non-Hispanic whites and the cable networks are simply meeting the demands of their audience. At the same time, given the number and wide assortment of series, there has to be a place for more coverage of the experiences of minority populations. Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. Portrayals of Rural People and Places in Reality Television Programming 55 CONCLUSION The current popularity of rural television shows in the United States has been nothing short of surprising given the major networks' mentality towards rural-themed programs during the rural purge of the late 1960s and early 1970s. This chapter outlined the various social, cultural, and economic fac- tors that paved the way for rural reality shows. The content analysis of reality shows that aired from 2005-2015 indicated that the number of shows with rural-based themes has steady increased on cable television to the point that they have literally saturated the weekly lineups of the channels with the largest viewership. They have become a proven commodity and appear set to remain so for the present time. As popular as this subgenre of reality television is, many of the shows raise concern among viewers, critics, and scholars with regard to their repre- sentation of rural people and places. While some shows provide a positive characterization, others merely provide entertainment value for viewers. while reinforcing age-old stereotypes. As mentioned at the end of this chap- ter, the true reality of rural America is rarely depicted in rural reality televi- sion. The lived experiences of groups such as rural women and racial and ethnic minorities often go unnoticed or shows actually go so far as to rein- force popular misconceptions surrounding them. As an emerging force in American popular culture, rural reality television deserves the attention of scholars across a variety of disciplines, as this chapter and other recent contributions to the literature have just scratched the surface. Some of the limitations of this chapter that could be addressed in the future include the need for a more rigorous quantitative content analysis of rural reality shows that would either provide support for the author's classifi- cation system or that would offer new insights that could lead to the con- struction of a more refined number of subgroups. With 127 shows and count- ing, more rigorous methods are required for a more valid interpretation of the words, messages, and symbols that are characteristics of these shows. Another important step would be to precisely identify what it is about rural reality shows that intrigues viewers. Is it the casts themselves, the sets where the action or drama take place, or the actual topics that are presented that are so unfamiliar and appealing to most viewers? Extensive survey re- search could help identify the factors that have contributed to the widespread acceptance of these shows and to determine which demographic groups are most likely to watch them. In turn, another important task to undertake would be to examine how these shows shape viewer impressions of rural people and places. This could inform scholars of the potential consequences of the mes- sages and images that are conveyed. Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. 99 56 Chapter 3 REFERENCES A&E Shows. (2015, December 20). Retrieved from http://aetv.com/shows/. Animal Planet TV Shows. (2015, December 20). Retrieved from http://animalplanet.com/CMT TV. (2015, December 22). Retrieved from http://cmt.com/shows/. Brown, D. L., and Schafft, K. A. (2011). Rural people and communities in the 21st century. Malden, MA: Polity Press. Buchanan, B. (2014). Portrayals of masculinity in the Discovery Channel's Deadliest Catch. In A. Slad, A. Narro, and B. Buchanan, Reality television: Oddities of culture (pp. 1-20). Lanham, MD: Lexington. Cavalcante, A. (2014). You better “redneckognize"!: Deploying the discourses of realness, social defiance, and happiness to defend here comes Honey Boo Boo on Facebook. In A. Slade, A. Narro, and B. Buchanan, Reality television: Oddities of culture (pp. 39-66). Lan- ham, MD: Lexington. Cox, K. (2011). Dreaming of Dixie: How the south was created in american popular culture. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. DeKeseredy, W. S., Muzzatti, S. L., and Donnermeyer, J. F. (2014). Mad men in bib overalls: Media's horrifcation and pornification of rural culture. Critical Criminology, 22, 179-197. Destination America TV Schedule. (2015, December 21). Retrieved from http://destination- america.com/tv-shows/tv-schedule/. Discovery Shows. (2015, December 20). Retrieved from http://discovery.com/tv-shows/. Flora, C. B., and Flora, J. L. (2013). Rural communities: Legacy and change (4th Edition). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Fulkerson, G., and Thomas, A. R. (2013). Studies in Urbanormativity: Rural Community in Urban Society. Lanham, MD: Lexington. GAC Shows. (2015, December 22). Retrieved from http://greatamericancountry.com/shows. HAC. (2012). Rural research brief: Race and ethnicity in rural America. Housing Assistance Council. Retrieved from http://www.ruralhome.org/storage/research_notes/rrn-race-and- ethnicity-web.pdf Haynes, J. (2014). “I See Swamp People”: Swamp people, southern horrors, and reality televi- sion. In A. Slade, A. Narro, and B. Buchanan, Reality television: Oddities of culture (pp. 245-257). Lanham, MD: Lexington. Hernandez, L. H. (2014). “I Was Born This Way”: The performance and production of South- ern masculinity in A&E's Duck Dynasty. In A. Slade, A. Narro, and B. Buchanan, Reality television: Oddities of culture (pp. 21-36). Lanham, MD: Lexington. History Shows. (2015, December 20). Retrieved from http://history.com/shows. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Jonsson, P. (2014). The Rise of ‘Redneck TV': Why TV's plunge into backwoods family, dan- ger, and colloquial wisdom transfixes America (and the world). Do the shows depict carica- tures or gritty authenticity? Retrieved from The Christian Science Monitor: http:// www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2014/1005/The-rise-of-redneck-TV. Kaiser, S. B., and Bernstein, S. T. (2014). Rural representations in fashion and television: Co- optation and cancellation. Fashion, Style, and Popular Culture, 1(1), 97-117. Krippendorf, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lichter, D. T., and Brown, D. L. (2011). Rural America in an urban society: Changing spatial and social boundaries. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 565-592. Lloyd, R. (2011). TV's Rugged, Rural Breed. Retrieved from Los Angeles Times: http:// articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/01/entertainment/la-et-1130-redneck-tv-20111201. Lobao, L., and Meyer, K. (2001). The Great Agricultural Transition: Crisis, Change, and Social Consequences of Twentieth Century U.S. Farming. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 103- 124. MAV TV Automotive Reality. (2015, December 22). Retrieved from http://mavtv.com/auto- motive-reality.html/. MTV Shows. (2015, December 22). Retrieved from http://mtv.com/shows. Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Portrayals of Rural People and Places in Reality Television Programming 57 Nabi, R. L. (2007). Determining dimensions of reality: A concept mapping of the reality TV landscape. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 51(2), 371-390. Nabi, R. L., Biely, E., Morgan, S. J., and Stitt, C. R. (2003). Reality-based Television Program- ming and the Psychology of Its Appeal. Media Psychology, 5, 303-340. National Geographic Shows. (2015, December 20). Retrieved from http://chan- nel.nationalgeographic.com/shows/. Ouellette, L., and Murray, S. (2004). Reality television: Remaking television culture (2nd edition). New York: New York University Press. REELZ Channel Shows. (2015, December 22). Retrieved from http://reelz.com/watch/. RFD-TV Shows. (2015, December 22). Retrieved from https://rfdtv.com/category/267410/ shows. Streisand, B. (2001). Did You Say Reality TV? Or Surreal TV? U.S. News and World Report, 130(3), 36-37. Tickamyer, A. R., and Henderson, D. A. (2003). Rural women: New roles for the new century? In D. Brown, and L. Swanson, Challenges for Rural America in the Twenty-First Century (109-131). University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. USDA-ERS. (2015). Poverty rates by family type and metro/nonmetro residence. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Retrieved from http:// www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/rural-poverty-well-being/poverty-dem- ographics.aspx Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. 36 Chapter 3 reality." This negative label is the result of concerns over the substance and legitimacy of a number of series with rural-based themes and critics contend that they unfairly portray the reality of rural people and places and serve to reinforce commonly held rural stereotypes (Buchanan, 2014; Cox, 2011; Hernandez, 2014). Since the Discovery Channel aired the first episode of Deadliest Catch (2005-Present), a show documenting the lives of Alaska crab fishermen on the Bering Sea, the emergence of rural-based reality programs as a form of popular entertainment has been nothing short of extraordinary and unrivaled among other subgenres of reality television. America's obsession with rural reality shows has driven networks to bring countless unusual, and often uncharacteristic, aspects of rural life into mainstream popular culture. How- ever, this ruralfication of popular culture has met with mixed reviews. While some shows celebrate rural traditions and values, the content of others has generated serious questions as to their authenticity. As ratings have soared, critics accuse producers and networks of ignoring the rich diversity of rural populations and livelihoods in the pursuit of advertising and marketing prof- its. There are also valid concerns about the misrepresentation and exploita- tion of the rural working-class that typically are the focus of the majority of rural reality shows. This chapter tracks the rise of rural reality television programming over the past decade, provides a 10-category classification system for the 127 rural-themed reality shows that have aired during that time, and examines how rural populations, culture, livelihoods, and places are depicted. The in- depth look into America's obsession with rural reality television presented here is also intended to identify the potential consequences these shows have for a large segment of the population that continues to be misunderstood and, consequently, misrepresented in mainstream American television program- ming and social media. The next section of this chapter reviews the factors that led to rural programming's nearly thirty-five-year hiatus from television lineups. Con- tributing factors included shifting public perceptions of small-town rural America in the 1960s, one of the most socially and politically tumultuous decades in the history of the nation, and networks prioritizing viewer demo- graphics and marketing profitability over ratings. Following this is a detailed discussion of the rise in popularity of reality television and how it generated renewed interest in a new breed of rural programming. The second half of the chapter provides the results of a content analysis of reality television shows designed to identify those with clear rural themes and to trace the rise in popularity of this unique brand of television entertainment. I also ascertain general trends across rural reality shows in order to provide a classification framework. Critics contend that many rural reality shows distort their repre- sentations of rural people and places to meet the expectations of their primar- Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. Portrayals of Rural People and Places in Reality Television Programming 37 ily urban audience and this serves to perpetuate long-held stereotypes. In an effort to address this, the chapter closes with a discussion of concerns asso- ciated with the "ruralfication" of popular culture when portrayed through an urbanormative (Fulkerson and Thomas, 2013, p. 7) lens. THE "RURAL PURGE" (1969–1972) AND DECLINE OF EARLY RURAL TELEVISION In the 1950s and 1960s, Westerns and situational comedies with rural themes enjoyed considerable popularity among American viewers and a number of these series firmly established themselves among the list of top-rated shows, as discussed by Fulkerson and Lowe (this volume). Potentially foreshadow- ing their eventual decline, many of these rural programs aired at a time when rural populations were experiencing a rapid decline (Kaiser and Bernstein, 2014). The success of these shows may have been partly due to a sense of nostalgia or a reflection of concerns with what was possibly being lost with growing urbanization. Rural people were portrayed as noble yet incredibly naive country folk from deep in the American heartland and the cast of these shows often consisted of well-known actors and actresses with established Hollywood pedigrees (e.g., Andy Griffith, Buddy Ebsen, James, Arness, Lorne Greene, Eddie Albert, and Eva Gabor). This made them comfortable figures that were easy to relate to among viewers. The stories depicted in the shows were typically light and comedic, or action packed and dramatic. The heroes and villains were easy to identify and the shows generally portrayed a picturesque and idealistic side of life in rural America. Many of the 1960s rural-themed television series experienced long runs and achieved high view- er ratings. Among the more popular shows were The Andy Griffith Show (1960-1968), The Beverly Hillbillies (1962-1971), and to a lesser extent, Green Acres (1965-1971), Petticoat Junction (1963-1970), and Hee Haw (1969-1971). However, the popularity of these shows was not enough to save them as network executives were concerned that they primarily ap- pealed to an older rural demographic and were not worthy of advertising dollars in the long-term (Kaiser and Bernstein, 2014). Contributing to the growing concerns over the viability of rural-themed television programs was the fact that the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) had grown particular- ly sensitive to its own image due to its growing reputation as the "Country Broadcasting System” that catered to older, rural, and less affluent viewers (Kaiser and Bernstein, 2014). At the time CBS was the leader in popular rural-themed shows. Eventually, the belief that rural programming was no longer relevant to the times and unpopular with the 18 to 49-year-old urban demographic led the networks to take drastic measures. What ensued was what was referred to in media circles as the rural purge, a three-season Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. 38 Chapter 3 period (1969-1972) during which American television networks-CBS in particular cancelled nearly all of their rural-themed shows. This move was surprising to many as a number of these shows were among the ratings leaders at the time they were not renewed. Despite this, four shows were dropped at the conclusion of the 1969-1970 television season, another seven- teen the following year, and six more between 1971-1975, including two long-running westerns, Gunsmoke (twenty years) and Bonanza (fourteen years). Many of the shows that were not renewed continued to enjoy popular- ity as reruns in syndication, but an era had drawn to a conclusion. The fact that the major networks were more concerned with the demo- graphics of their viewers than with ratings demonstrated the strength of the voice of younger urban viewers who were more interested in dramas, sit- coms, crime and action series, and family shows that were centered in urban and suburban locales and that represented what they believed to be contem- porary urban dwellers and issues and that were considered to be progressive and socially relevant given the times. This led to the popularity of shows such as the Brady Bunch (1969–1974), All in the Family (1971–1979), M*A*S*H (1972–1983), the Bob Newhart Show (1972–1978), and Emergen- cy! (1972-1977). It is important to note that a small number of new rural-themed drama programs such as The Waltons (1972-1981) and Little House on the Prairie (1974-1983) did experience some success throughout the 1970s and into the early 1980s. The Dukes of Hazzard (1979-85) was the lone exception to the rule about the ban on rural-themed comedies. Aside from this limited slate of programs (see Fulkerson and Lowe, this volume), rural life was rarely ever depicted in network television outside of nature and hunting and fishing shows until the turn of the twenty-first century when cable channels em- braced the popularity of reality television. Even then, rural-themed shows have rarely resurfaced in programming among the major networks. THE RISE OF REALITY TELEVISION AND THE RURAL RESURGENCE The genre of reality television owes much of its evolution to the assortment of talk shows and niche programming featuring live studio audiences and colorful casts in their everyday settings (e.g., cooking and outdoors shows) that broke from traditional pre-filmed shows with trained actors. Some tele- vision scholars argue that MTV's The Real World (1992-Present), provided the initial model for what most have come to identify as contemporary reality television (Ouellette and Murray, 2004). The gradual rise in popularity of Real World, which followed the experiences of groups of young adults living together under one roof in a new city, "trained a generation of young viewers Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. Portrayals of Rural People and Places in Reality Television Programming 39 in the language of reality TV" (Ouellette and Murray, 2004, p. 5). According to Ouellette and Murray (2004), Real World paved the way for the Survivor franchise (2000-Present) and Big Brother (2000-Present), reality game shows that first aired internationally in the late 1990s before breaking into the American market,. The popularity of these shows marked the full emer- gence of this genre which has withstood the test of time as both are still currently in production. Most viewers could probably identify what constitutes reality television. However the industry itself has not provided a clear definition of the genre (Nabi, 2007). As a result, this task has been left in the hands of television scholars. Nabi and colleagues (2003, p. 304) provide perhaps the most inclu- sive description of reality television which they define as “programs that film real people as they live out events in their lives, contrived or otherwise, as they occur." Identifying characteristics are that they: (a) involve “real peo- ple" playing themselves; (b) are filmed to some degree in actual living or working conditions of the cast; (c) involve both the ordinary and extraordi- nary aspects of their lives; (d) are largely unscripted; (e) typically have a distinctively well-spoken narrator who provides an introduction to each show and who announces the transition from one scene to the next; and (f) are produced for the primary purpose of viewer entertainment (Nabi, 2007; Ouellette and Murray, 2004). Since its beginnings in the early 1990s, the genre of reality television has evolved into a number of different subgenres (Haynes, 2014). Series have commonly revolved around the divergent themes of game shows (e.g., Survi- vor, Big Brother, The Apprentice), dating programs (e.g., The Bachelor, The Bachelorette), talent contests (e.g., Americas Got Talent, American Idol), makeovers (Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Extreme Makeover, Pimp My Ride), legal and courtroom television (e.g., Cops, Judge Judy, The Peoples' Court), celebrity series that make past-their-prime pop culture stars appear more like “regular” people (e.g., The Surreal Life, Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew), reality sitcoms (e.g., The Simple Life, The Osbournes), and docusoaps (e.g., The Real World, The Real Housewives of Orange County) (Ouellette and Murray, 2004). One can add the subgenre of docu-series to those listed above. These shows examine the occupations and lifestyles of hard-working American men and women and rural reality shows began as a spin-off to this subgenre. Perhaps the most popular series from this subgenre was the Discovery Chan- nel's Dirty Jobs (2005-2012) whose host always began each show with the statement that "My name's Mike Rowe, and this is my job. I explore the country looking for people who aren't afraid to get dirty hard-working men and women who earn an honest living doing the kinds of jobs that make civilized life possible for the rest of us. Now, get ready to get dirty." Mike - Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. 40 40 Chapter 3 Rowe, who is also a voice artist, also serves as the narrator of Deadliest Catch, the series this chapter identifies as the show that sparked the popular- ity of rural reality television. The decade following the series premier of Deadliest Catch witnessed the gradual rise of rural reality television as arguably the most diverse and ex- pansive of all reality show subgenres. As the number of shows and channels carrying them have grown, rural reality television has certainly attracted a wide viewership while capturing a substantial share of the ratings as de- scribed by Jonsson (2014). Despite the massive viewership of the World Cup this summer, Duck Dynasty, about the Robertson family of Louisiana and its successful duck- call business, hovered at the top of the rankings after becoming one of the biggest cable hits in history in 2013. Swamp People, Mountain Men, and a handful of other rural reality TV shows competed for slots in the Top 25, and others garnered significant viewership. This included American River Rene- gades, which chronicles the lives of fishermen from the Great Pee Dee River in South Carolina to the northern reaches of the Mississippi. The Appeal of Rural Reality Television for American Viewers The degree to which viewers have embraced rural reality television over the past decade has been nothing short of surprising given the nearly complete exclusion of rural-themed shows from the major networks since the 1970s. The steady wave of new shows depicting rural occupations, colorful, and often bizarre, characters behaving well outside the boundaries of convention- al social norms, natural and often remote settings in the farthest reaches of the United States, rural people living off the land, and rags-to-riches stories have drawn viewers from every age demographic. Reality TV's simple for- mula has provided viewers with a dramatic break from traditional program- ming as it provides unpredictable plot lines and the opportunity to watch real people put into situations that viewers normally would never consider. It has become an addiction for many viewers and fits perfectly with the current era of social media where viewers can write about shows online and converse with other fans in real time. It seems that a new rural-themed show is intro- duced every few weeks and there appears to be no end in sight as there is a limitless pool of material to draw from. Much of the appeal for rural reality television relates to the fact that shows are not nearly as scripted as mainstream reality shows (Ouellette and Murray, 2004). While many cast members in other subgenres of reality TV are overly concerned with the trappings of popular culture, those on rural reality shows are generally portrayed as being down-to-earth and extraordi- narily ordinary. In a 2011 Los Angeles Times editorial, television critic Rob- ert Lloyd (2011) alluded to this in his comment that: Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. Portrayals of Rural People and Places in Reality Television Programming Some (cast members) smoke cigarettes, and not to look sophisticated. They dress in their own clothes, for comfort or for work. Many could stand to lose a few pounds, to start. With some exceptions—the female characters tend to be conventionally hot, conventionally—they are not like people Hollywood casts for lead roles. Some are even old—the men of “Gold Rush," out of work and prospecting for gold, are almost all in their 40s, 50s and 60s, and that is part of the story. As TV, there is something refreshing about it. 41 If viewers were seeking a break from normal programming fair, this subgen- re of reality television has certainly delivered. New shows reveal a side of America that most urban viewers, who comprise the majority of the audi- ence, are completely unaccustomed to and they have the opportunity to watch rural residents doing seemingly unreal things in a modern world (Lloyd, 2011). Jonsson (2014) further explains that rural reality television shows could not have picked a better time to emerge and to gradually domi- nate cable ratings: The rise of redneck TV has paralleled one of the toughest economic stretches for the American worker since the Great Depression, a time of polarized poli- tics and economic data that shows the middle-class dream is slipping away. Some experts believe this malaise has pushed Americans toward the visual equivalent of escapism and comfort food: shows about family, adventure, danger, elemental nature, and colloquial wisdom, such as "Swamp People" star Jeromy Pruitt complaining about a tough day on the bayou: “It's hard as Chinese arithmetic out here, boy." Perhaps it is largely the belief that there is something better out there, a more preferable way of life that is simpler and more rewarding than the normal eight to five day job that draws many viewers to rural reality shows. Among those amassing the highest ratings are series about industrious Americans working the land, carving out a living in often uninhabitable places using their own hands. Far removed from the crowds and hustle and bustle of urban areas, these shows provide viewers with a backstage pass to indulge them- selves in the often life-or-death struggles of hardworking rural people hunt- ing hogs, grappling with alligators, catching fish with their hands or contrap- tions derived from the resources around them, and living off the land, all the while feeling content with their way of life. Many of these shows offer a viewer discretion advisory at the beginning, one of the most popular of which is from Swamp People, the number one rated cable show during its time-slot: "The way of life depicted in this program dates back 300 years. Hunting, especially alligator hunting, lies at its core. Some images may be disturb- ing... viewer discretion is advised." Further contributing to the rise in popularity of rural reality television is that producers can create a seemingly limitless number of series since film- ing is less expensive as it does not require highly paid and trained profession- Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. 42 Chapter 3 al actors and actresses, relies on an abundance of natural sets, and props are often whatever is on hand at the time. Coupled with the largely unscripted nature of rural reality series, this means shows can be produced quickly, cheaply, and without many of the complication associated with costly tradi- tional television series. With advertisers always seeking ways to reach the prized demographic category of 18-49 year-old urban viewers, rural reality television provides an attractive opportunity as should one show fail, there is always another that can quickly replace it (Streisand, 2001). The flexibility of rural reality shows allows producers to match the viewer's demands. If they like shows that focus on dangerous occupations, there is a limitless array of jobs, no matter how obscure, in rural areas to choose from. If they want drama and conflict between cast members, they create tension by pitting competing groups against one another in search of riches (e.g., Gold Rush and Bering Sea Gold) or by creating a wrap up show that airs after each episode and provides cast members with a chance to air their opinions of one another and to answer viewer questions live. Rural reality television offers armchair adventurers of all ages the oppor- tunity to experience a completely different way of life that often takes them well outside of their comfort zone. At the same time, the down home cast and natural settings are not typically portrayed as dirty, ignorant, menacing, or, in some cases, highly sexualized as the rural men and women stereotyped in the popular "rural slasher” movies Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) and The Hills Have Eyes (1977) (DeKeseredy, Muzzatti, and Donnermeyer, 2014, p. 180) or the inbred (see Hayden, this volume) and sinister mountain men and ruthless Bayou swamp trappers in dramatic thrillers such as Deliverance (1972) and Southern Comfort (1981). Rural reality shows have softened the image of rural Americans to some degree. This makes them less scary and mysterious. However, the topics covered and the depictions of rural people are still carefully crafted by the producers of these shows and are intended to provide some measure of familiarity that meets the preconceived expecta- tions of the viewers who are largely based in urban areas. The remainder of this chapter presents the results of a content analysis of reality television programming that provide a more precise picture of the evolution of the subgenre of rural reality shows by tracing its growth over the last decade and identifying the networks and channels that have served as its primary champions. From the results of the content analysis, I provide a 10- category classification system for rural reality shows based on shared themes or formats. The chapter concludes with a critical assessment of the extent to which rural reality television distorts the reality of twenty-first century rural America. Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47. Copyright © 2016. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Portrayals of Rural People and Places in Reality Television Programming 51 DISTORTING THE REALITY OF TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY RURAL AMERICA As Lichter and Brown (2011, p. 566) point out, there is an “increasing inter- dependence of rural and urban life” and drawing “sharp rural-urban distinc- tions seems increasingly obsolete or even problematic.” Rural and urban America have become increasingly interconnected economically, socially, and culturally and even those rural populations traditionally left behind are much less isolated from mainstream influences. As a result, the social and spatial boundaries between rural and urban have become blurred (Lichter and Brown, 2011). Despite this growing interdependence, the diverse experi- ences and characteristics of rural people and places remain largely misunder- stood by much, if not the majority, of the nation's population. Popular cul- Reimagining Rural: Urbanormative Portrayals of Rural Life, edited by Gregory M. Fulkerson, and Alexander R. Thomas, Lexington Books, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/wvu/detail.action?docID=4538965. Created from wvu on 2018-08-09 07:08:47.