Definitely! You couldn’t be more right. It seems to be so much easier to make programmes out of the negatives of life than the positives. Maybe if TV was all about doing nice things for nice people or about the niceties of life then we’d all need a vomit bag while we watched TV, but still, there’s a limit. Even TV shows gone by like Room 101 were about celebrities moaning about what they don’t like (although Stephen Fry made a similar point to yours by putting Room 101 itself into Room 101 for being what it is: a base for people to be horrible about things they don’t like). But there has to be a balance and if TV is supposed to show us a version of reality then indeed, like you say, we will start to believe that the business world is like Dragon’s Den, that getting into the music business is like X Factor (or whatever generic format they’re running at the moment) and the way to create and sustain relationships is by mimicing the tantrums in Big Brother.

There is a spectrum of this though, and where does one stop? Does your opinion reach from shows created to pour vitriol by the vat full on members of the public to things like comedy, which can be as aggressive and brutal? Is satire justified because it wasn’t the one that started it or is it just because it’s more professional and a little more artistic?

Sorry. Excessive comment. But you’re making people think, which is a fabulous thing. Keep it up, I love these.

Debs xxx

p.s. it just goes to show you can’t be too careful…

Argh… that was a nasty shock when Anne Robinson suddenly appeared at the table?! ~She shudders~

Well yet another dead on commentary Mr. Mitchell!

I’ve long held the opinion that reality tv as a whole is having a detrimental impact on today’s society. It seems to foster in it’s contestants the very worst aspects of human nature, which then filter out to the audiences who eventually become numb to what, not so long ago, would’ve been considered unthinkable behaviour. Your metaphor of the teapot was both apt and beautifully said.

This latest Soapbox has been, for me, one of the precious few bright spots in an overall yucky week. Thank you ever so much for the giggle it mercifully provided, and for continuing to provide a voice of reason and courtesy amidst the cacophany of crass and obtuse rhetoric that pervades our culture.

Because, as a wise man once said, “It just goes to show… “well, I think you get the point.

It just goes to show you can’t be too careful!

Congratulations Mr Baddiel, I fucking despise words like twat, bollocks and dare I say, nobbs……or whatever. Personally, I blame talentless fuckwits like James Corden and that other c**t, not to mention Wossy and that total prick Brand. Keep up the good work old chap.

You sir are bloody brilliant!

I love the teapot analogy.

And I too hate Weakest Link because the host is so unnecessarily rude. I haven’t watched Dragon’s Den, but if the parodies of it are anything to judge by, it’s just as well that I don’t begin watching. But I kinda like Come Dine with me — not for the comments (rude or otherwise), but just to see how other people throw a dinner party (something I like doing, but have little opportunity to indulge in). Also for the delight in discovering some famous people are good in the kitchen.

Mennah
March 24th, 2009 - 4:49am

Confused by Ms Nobbs’ comment; are you calling David Mr Baddiel? Isn’t that a bit rude?

JGTSYCBTC!

Confused or just f*****g thick?

¡ʍʇɟ pıʌɐp

I completely enjoy his rant and can agree with many points. But I do find the “rudeness for rudeness sake” entering most, if not all, reality shows. But I do find it interesting that David Mitchell is part of one of the rudest (and funniest in my opinion) TV shows on, Peep Show. As Peep Show is not reality, but staged, and therefore “Art”, it goes back to the classic question, is art imitating life, or is life imitating art? Without staged TV shows pushing the rudeness boundary… would reality shows that do have been aired?