From Reality Stars to Charity Recipients Overnight.

sowhat (29)in #philosophy • 7 years ago (edited)

Normally we hear about reality television creating overnight success stories, but for the contestants of home renovation programme The Block NZ , their overnight story took a very different turn.

On Sunday night they were television contestant finalists, by Monday morning they were Givealittle charity recipients.

theblock nz.jpg

Here's What Happened
On Sunday 17 September 2017, four couples went to auction in the Season 6 finale of The Block NZ . This concluded their twelve week stint completely renovating four four-storey townhouses on Auckland’s North Shore.

The contestants were not paid to be on the show. Instead, they take home the profit from the sale of their property on auction night (this is defined as the money over the reserve price). Whichever couple makes the highest profit wins the show and an additional $100,000NZD.

Auction 1: Ling and Zing made $1,000NZD profit
Auction 2: Andy and Nate’s house got passed in.
Auction 3: Julia & Ali made $13,000NZD profit.
Auction 4: Stace & Yanita made $20,000NZD profit.

At the end of Auction 4, the host told Stace and Yanita that they had only “provisionally won” because there was an opportunity for Andy and Nate to have a second auction. Allowing a couple to have a second go at auction was a Block first in all 19 seasons of the show, in NZ and Australia.

Andy and Nate’s house sold (second-time round) making a profit of $31,000NZD. With the highest profit, they were now the show’s winner and were awarded the $100,000NZD prize, winning a total of $131,000NZD. Andy and Nate also won the People's Choice Award, a Honda Civic RS sport turbo hatch.

theblocknz winners.jpg

When Reality TV Audiences Rewrite the Show's Ending
The creation of a fifth auction caused public outcry and a social media frenzy. People claimed Andy and Nate stole the win from Stace & Yanita and disgruntled viewers felt Ling and Zing were hard done by when they only made $1,000NZD despite selling their house for the highest price.

One upset viewer did the math and tweeted:

The tweet appeared in online news websites which claimed the stars were essentially “slave labour” (R1).

Fans took it upon themselves to ‘right the wrong’.

A Givealittle page was set up for Ling and Zing, which at the time of writing has received $19,857NZD putting them just shy of the $20,000NZD the second-place getters on auction night. (R2)

A Givealittle page was also set up for Stace and Yanita and is at $3,439.00NZD, at time of writing (R3). Stace and Yanita have since stated that any money raised on their Givealittle page will be donated to Lifeline Aotearoa, a mental health services helpline organisation. (R4)

Freedom Furniture, a key sponsor of the show, has offered each of the couples a $5,000NZD consolation prize. (R5)

History Repeating Itself
This is not the first time the NZ public have changed the course of a reality television show.

In March 2015 two judges on The X Factor NZ, husband and wife Willy Moon and Natalia Kills, were fired from the show after they bullied a contestant on a live show and the public and sponsors demanded they be removed from the show. (R6)

This is also not the first time that the NZ public have voluntarily paid for reality contestants.

In Season 1 of The Block NZ engaged couple and parents Rachel and Tyson sold their house for the reserve price, meaning they didn't take away any money from the show. This did not go down well with the NZ viewing public. Well-known television presenter Brooke Howard-Smith created an account to raise money for the couple. Overnight the NZ public had raised $14,453.22NZD before Rachel and Tyson asked Howard-Smith to close the account. The couple announced that all money donated over $11,000NZD (the amount the third place winners received at auction) would be given to charity because they didn't think it would be fair to take more money then the couple who came third. (R7). The public's response to the ending of Season One also resulted in the The People's Choice prize being introduced in Season Two. Tyson has responded to Andy and Nate’s second auction by asking “Why didn’t they do that with us?” (R8)

It’s also important to acknowledge that there are people who see the way the auctions ran in Season Two as unfair but also a part of reality of the show, and therefore not the job of the public to dip into their wallets to help the contestants. There are also people who thought the auctions were fair, because its a reality show, that is what they signed up for, and that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

SoWhat? can we learn from the events of the Block NZ auction and aftermath?

There are three key teachable moments:

This media moment is a great example of how important television is in our culture and how invested an audience can become in a show. The Block NZ created a community of Blockheads. For some, the show is more than just entertainment, it has become their reality. When we see people on screen that are 'just like us', or someone we know, we connect - we become part of the journey. After invested 12 long weeks of their time watching the show, some viewers became so absorbed in The Block world and were so desperate for the show to have its "happily ever after" ending that they created it themselves.
It gives an insight into the values of New Zealand culture and demonstrates how they are applied. On the one hand, you have an attitude that motivates people (with spare change) to voluntarily dip into their pockets to help those they feel have been cheated by the system, as an attempt to right the wrong. On the other hand, there is an attitude that there is a clear system in place which states that there is no guarantee of contestants walking away with large sums of money so some people will do better than others and that is OK because that's how the system works.
This media moment highlights how blurred the lines around our definition of reality television are. Audience members who gave back to the contestants or supported the act of doing so prioritise the perceived concept of reality that the show has. While those who were not in favour of this reaction prioritise the television aspect of the program. Our perception as a viewer determines the lens through which we view and experience the program.

TELEVISION IS CULTURAL MACHINE. IT CREATES, REPLICATES, AND DISSEMINATES IMAGES AND IDEAS FROM CULTURE BACK ONTO ITSELF.

THIS ARTICLE IS AN ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION

Author: Melissa Gould, Ph.D (AUT), MCS, BCS (Hons), BCS.
Dr Melissa Gould holds a Ph.D from the School of Communications at Auckland University of Technology in Auckland, New Zealand. She worked as a Media and Communications Lecturer at the School, and now works as an independent researcher and writer. Her primary research areas include media communication theory and cultural studies that examine religion, gender, childhood and consumerism.