The Justin Bieber Effect?: Kids and Competitive Reality Shows

Kids and reality television are a popular, if controversial, mix. What happens when you add competition to the mix? The situation can become volatile. It seems that kids are appearing more often in what are "competitive reality shows," as opposed to "candid reality shows." What's the difference?  Candid reality shows, which would include the Real Housewives and The Real World franchises, follow people in their everyday lives or as they prepare for a specific event. That event could be a competition, as in Toddlers & Tiaras-- but the show itself isn't a competition. American Idol and Survivor, on the other hand, are competitive reality shows. The competition is the show, and because we get to know the contestants over a season a narrative arc develops (which separates them from straight game shows, for example).

Long before the boom of reality TV Star Search ruled the airwaves. If you're like me, or hundreds of other children of the 80s, you wanted to dance like the kids from America's Apple Pie who won many consecutive weeks in 1988.

After Star Search the next big talent show to hit the airwaves was, of course, American Idol, in 2002.  The biggest show on television tried to add a children's competition during the summer of 2003-- American Juniors. The show, meant to create a kids' superstar pop group, faltered in the ratings and never returned (though it did bring us Lucy Hale, who now stars in ABC Family's Pretty Little Liars). I suspect that many viewers felt uncomfortable voting out tweens, preteens, and teens, crushing their dreams.  (At the time I read that many of the parents were difficult behind the scenes as well, but it's unclear if this had anything to do with the decision not to renew the show.)

Shortly after American Idol lowered its entry age, allowing minors to compete.  While this has produced several stars and winners, like Jordin Sparks, it's hard on both the show and contestants to be limited in rehearsal time, fit in schooling, and deal with guardians who must be present (even on tour).  Other shows have emerged, briefly, to stage similar competitive talent competitions in the high school age group, including  2008's High School Musical: Get in the Picture (which also was a ratings flop).  It seems like Americans want their (Disney) pop stars produced behind the scenes, rather than eliminated in front of them, and even at our own hands in audience voting shows.

But in the past week two new shows started that have made me wonder if times are changing and we are now willing to put kids through the same televised competitions as adults.  First of all, Simon Cowell's new show, The X Factor, allows kids as young as 12 to compete. This is much lower than the American Idol minimum age requirement (just lowered to 15 last year). I know the show is trying to attract new and different talent, but to me this decision (and lack of protest) suggests a new willingness in the American viewing audience to subject kids to the same rigors as adults.

And, then there is a new series on The Hub: Majors & Minors.  Majors & Minors (I'm sure the pun was intentional) focuses on twelve aspiring musicians aged 10-16.  The host said at the beginning of the show that no contestant would be eliminated and no one would vote.  Yet, the first episode centered on the "final callbacks," in which 29 kids were cut to 12.  Clearly there was a cut-- but unlike other reality shows, the eliminated contestants weren't really featured (you could get glimpses of them in footage of classes from the final callbacks).  Some of the kids seem extremely talent, so I'll be interested to watch as the series unfolds. While there aren't eliminations, this is a "music competition series," and the kids are competing for a recording and tour deal.  There will be a "winner," and I'm sure all the parents and kids want that prize.

In both Majors & Minors and the X Factor, Justin Bieber was was mentioned. I am guessing his pop superstardom (along with others of late, like Willow Smith) has shown record execs that young kids can succeed and sell a lot of records (my sense is that Michael Jackson's young success may have sullied these waters for some time, for multiple reasons).  Do you believe there can and should be another Justin Bieber, or even Taylor Swift, who started out as a successful songwriter and performer at a young age?

A final interesting kids/competition/reality twist this week: Last night while watching the premiere of The Amazing Race, I realized that one of the teams is the father and son from the Sunderland family. Who are they? Well the son, Zac, became the youngest person to sail around the world at age 17 in 2009. You may recall that his younger sister,  Abby, made international headlines in 2010 when she attempted to break his record.. but had to be rescued out at sea. At the time the rumor was that the Sunderlands, especially the father, had been/were shopping around a family reality show. I wrote about them, in light of the Balloon Boy scandal, and other kid reality scandals, in USA Today.  The reality show never materialized, but their appearance here makes me wonder. Was reality TV always the focus, as was rumored? How far will the father/son duo go and will they now parlay this competitive reality appearance  into their own show?

The "Grand" Finale: Ending Season 4 of Toddlers & Tiaras (from The Huffington Post Culture)

You've seen the four-year-old dressed up as Dolly Parton (complete with "enhancements"), right? And, of course, you've seen the images of the three-year-old dressed up as Julia Roberts' prostitute character from Pretty Woman, haven't you? Judging by the ratings for TLC's fourth season of Toddlers & Tiaras, it seems you have. Each week over two million people tune in to watch the series. The show, which premiered almost three years ago in January 2009, has always been talked about. But over the past month it has shot into the stratosphere of pop culture. Not since the death of JonBenét Ramsey have child beauty pageants received so much media coverage. This week, for example, the cover of People features five-year-old Madisyn (aka Maddy) Verst -- little "Dolly Parton" dolled up in her cupcake beauty pageant dress -- and asks, "Gone Too Far?"

I've been studying child beauty pageants for over a decade and I do believe that shows like Toddlers & Tiaras have gone too far. Such young pageant contestants should not be featured on television.

As Wednesday night's season finale of Toddlers & Tiaras made clear, pageant moms are acutely aware of the television cameras. One mother harshly whispered into her five-year-old daughter's ear during an at-home practice session: "We are on camera. Don't you dare tell me 'no' one more time. Do you hear me? We are on national TV. Everybody's going to see this. Do you hear me?" After her daughter, Carley, said, "Yeah," her mom immediately pasted a smile on her face and declared in a kinder tone, "Ok. We're doing the Cruella de Vil run through. I want this..." But Carley cut her off declaring, "You are driving me crazy!" Mommie Dearest-like scenes are decidedly uncomfortable to watch, though that doesn't mean we should go to the extreme of banning child beauty pageants outright. Activists recently tried this approach in Australia after the introduction of "American-style" child beauty pageants in July. But they were unsuccessful and the pageant show went on.

CLICK HERE TO KEEP READING ON HUFFPO, OR READ BELOW!

Outlawing child beauty pageants in the United States is also not a serious option. As legal scholars, like Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, and historians, like Holly Brewer, have detailed, American families have long been free to pursue any activities in their own home that they deem suitable for their own children. The state is not likely to interfere with day-to-day parenting decisions, unless the child is placed in an environment that is clearly unsafe and abusive. The bar is set pretty high -- physical abuse, neglect, and abandonment. While some may feel that spray-tanning a child, for example, is a form of abuse, it is not like hitting or binding a child. In general the government takes a hands-off approach to children's activities. Even children's boxing, deemed physically unsafe for thousands of young children by the American Association of Pediatrics earlier this month because of the risk of chronic and acute brain injuries, is legal in the United States.

Instead of pushing for a general ban on child beauty pageants, opponents push for an airwaves ban. The Parents Television Council, for example, released a statement demanding that TLC cancel its hit show: "Such brazen and wanton material should qualify as child exploitation or abuse."

The critics are right. Shows featuring young pageant girls -- especially those who have not yet even started school -- are becoming more and more inappropriate. With competition for limited airtime on reality televisions shows, participants resort to outrageous antics to get on the air (see: Nicole "Snooki" Polizzi of Jersey Shore). Whatever you may think of the ridiculous, self-serving behavior of willing adults, it is wrong for parents to use their children to advance themselves.

Images of these children are more permanent than ever thanks to the Internet. Memories live on in concrete form that future classmates will be able to access. We don't have hard data on specific long-term effects of children's appearances on reality television, but it's hard to imagine that there won't be serious consequences when it comes to friendships, romantic relationships, and assessments of self-worth.

Because of outrageous antics staged to augment fifteen minutes of fame, real accomplishments are overshadowed. In the past week a sixteen-year-old girl became the youngest women to win an LPGA tournament, a fifteen-year-old girl was named to the gymnastics team that will represent the United States at the World Championships in Tokyo next month, and another fifteen-year-old girl won a math tournament at MIT. I'd rather see any of these girls, who have worked hard to develop a talent, on the cover of People, or featured in a reality television show.

I'm sure pageant queen Carley spoke for millions of concerned adults during the season finale of Toddlers & Tiaras. Let's hope she and her child pageant friends won't be driven crazy on camera for much longer.

(Also posted at orgtheory with the following commentary: In addition to guest posting at orgtheory this month, I also blog at The Huffington Post. Check out my latest over at HuffPo Culture on the TLC show Toddlers & Tiaras. This piece, in which I argue that this particular show should no longer be on the air, brings together some of my work on child beauty pageants, kids and reality television, and children’s rights. I also (hopefully) show that it’s a good thing for (academic) sociologists to watch television. I am not ashamed to watch TV, including reality shows!)

Shrinking and Pinking: Milestones and Menstruation

It's been an interesting month for female athletes. Yesterday 16-year-old Lexi Thompson (who I have previously featured in a Shrinking and Pinking post in which I named her a "star of the future," which was clearly spot-on!) became the youngest ever winner of an LPGA event. While she's not old enough to join the LPGA tour (you have to be 18 to do that), she does get in the record books and take home a $195,000 pay check.  Her father served as the caddy for this homeschooled high schooler-- and golf clearly runs in their family. Her eldest brother plays on the PGA tour, another brother plays for Louisiana State, and her mother played junior golf in South Florida.

Not surprisingly, golf is pretty competitive in their household. The New York Times reports: "Nicholas [the eldest] was the catalyst; his brother and sister grew up alternately emulating him and competing against him in high-stakes backyard chipping and putting contests. The loser would have to empty the dishwasher, take out the trash or perform some other hated chore."

I love the novelty of putting for chores, so I don't mind reading about those contests.  But it is striking to me that the article gives just as much space to covering Lexi's looks as it does to these backyard contests: "Thompson, blond and nearly 6 feet tall, could be a cover girl for Golf magazine or Glamour. This weekend she received marriage proposals on the course and on Twitter. She is young and attractive and American, making her a coveted commodity on a tour that has been dominated in recent years by foreign-born players and that has struggled to maintain sponsorships and a full schedule."  Even in the context of such a significant milestone, looks still matter in a pink athletic world.

A few weeks ago it was more significant when several markers and milestones did not fall in the world of women's athletics.  Not one women's world record was broken at the Track and Field World Championships held in Daegu, South Korea. (My husband, a serious runner and track fan, got me hooked on the meets this year.) Women's records, and looks, remain an issue in this sport as well. I found this article on the lack of records in women's track fascinating.   The author argues that women's records should be expunged because of suspected doping violations (suspected based on other cases, almost improbable performances, and, yes, women's looks).  "Looks" in general remain an issue in women's track-- take the case of Caster Semenya-- but even she has not broken any world records.

Also not breaking any world records, but opening up an important discussion after her performance at Worlds, is Lauren Fleshman. Fleshman is a middle and long distance runner from the United States who finished seventh in in the 5000m at Worlds (my husband, showing an unexpected gossip-y side, informed me that when he was running college track/cross country Fleshman was the "hot running girl from Stanford").

Fleshman maintains a great website/blog and after the meet posted her thoughts on her performance.  The most interesting part to me was the following comment at the end of her post:

"If you are a dude, be warned that the following paragraph contains feminine stuff:

The race fell on the absolute worst day of the month for my cycle, and I can’t help but wonder how I would have felt had that not been the case (I get 4 pounds heavier and sluggish at that time of the month). But maybe defending world champ Linet Masai is saying the same thing about her 6th place finish. Maybe the young Dibaba that I passed at the line had the flu. Defar had stomach problems. Molly Huddle had an injured foot. Our fastest American, Shalane, wasn’t even in the race. I guess that’s what championships are all about, and have always been about: unknowns and variables and who toes the line on the day. That spirit of championships will never change, and I wouldn’t change it if I could.  But I would like to change my cycle next time, please. Or at least learn how to lesson the side-effects of bloating and water retention.  Tips from other women with experience in this area would be appreciated!  Thanks!"

The comments section is filled with interesting suggestions and tips that likely could help other female athletes. It also reminded me of a great piece from The New York Times on female athletes' menstrual cycles, which appeared earlier this summer.  The Times article discusses several different studies on the effect of the menstrual cycle, and female hormones, on athletic performance. While it's not all bad, it's clear there is a reason that women in the 1980s supposedly took male hormones, and not female hormones, to improve their athletic outcomes.

While female athletes do need to negotiate the realities of their bodies, more gender lines are being crossed than ever before. In a show of some hometown love, Therea Scruton, a senior at Framingham High School, recently joined the boys' football team. Congrats and good luck to Theresa! (Though, of course, my favorite female high school football player remains college classmate Anna Lakovitch, who was a kicker for her Florida team. She now owns what looks to be an amazing restaurant, Ollie Irene, in Mountain Brook, Alabama, which you should check out if you are in the area!)

UPDATE: The day after I posted this blog, news broke that the international federation for track and field (the IAAF) had changed the rules for women's marathon world records. Essentially a woman can no longer set a record in a race run with men (presumably because the set pace will be faster). Well, ok, maybe... But that also means that they are changing the existing records on the books. So the "new" world record for a female marathoner is now slower than it was before, because the fastest was set in a race with men. I know sport has become increasingly numericized, and I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing.  But this decision makes it harder both for fans to follow the sport and for athletes to promote and support themselves (for instance, if you can say you are the world's fastest woman at X, you will likely get more and better endorsements). This sort of promotion is especially important for women, I think, as men tend to get a lot of the attention. Yesterday The New York Times posted a story on this (head-scratching) decision near the top of their website, so I'd expect to hear more about this, especially in the lead-up to next summer's Olympics. The first line is especially powerful: "Now added to the list of banned performance-enhancing substances for female distance runners: men. "

Miss Universe 2012: Pageant or Informerical? (from orgtheory.net)

Last night Miss Angola, 25-year-old Leila Lopes, was crowned the 60th Miss Universe—the first ever winner from Angola.  She beat out 89 other hopefuls in Sao Paulo, Brazil to take the crown.  The hosts declared this to be the “most coveted title in the world,” a statement I’m sure many would disagree with, even if some of the prizes seem nice. While Miss Universe is the most-watched beauty pageant worldwide, at times it seemed like nothing more than an extended infomercial.  Between long features on the host city/country and massive product placement for sponsors (like OPI and Chi) there was very little actual pageant to watch.  Sure, we saw the women strut in their bikinis (where the commentators did mention several times that all the contestants were wearing the same Catalina suits and Chinese Laundry nude heels) and glide across the stage in their evening gowns. And of course we were treated to the Top 5 answering a final question live (always interesting in the Miss Universe Pageant with translators—this time those who spoke Ukrainian, Chinese [not sure whether Cantonese or Mandarin], and Portuguese).  But viewers also had to endure many endless dramatic pauses that would put Ryan Seacrest to shame during the announcements of finalists and winners.

While beauty pageants are rarely just about “beauty,” this year’s Miss Universe Pageant highlighted the business-side of beauty pageants.  It’s basically the only televised competition I know where the judges’ results are not completely honored. As was said during the broadcast at the announcement of the Top 16, “members of the Miss Universe Organization” also help select the finalists. Donald Trump, who bought the pageant in 1996, wants to make sure he and his people like the winner… But imagine if Mark Burnett openly had a hand in selecting the winner of Survivor.  Sure, television producers can manipulate shows through editing and selection of challenges for contestants, but they can’t actually cast a vote or change the rules to protect their favorites.

CLICK HERE TO KEEP READING AT ORGTHEORY-- AND FOR MORE NATIONAL COSTUMES-- OR KEEP READING BELOW!

Then again, if you know anything about the history of the Miss Universe Pageant, this might not surprise you. Miss USA/Universe has always been the tawdrier, sexier, and more commercial cousin to Miss America. In 1951 when the newly-crowned Miss America Yolande Betbeze refused to be crowned in her swimsuit (the Miss America Pageant actually started out as a bathing beauty contest in 1921 and didn’t fully move toward “respectability” until after WWII), Catalina, pulled their sponsorship and started the Miss USA/Universe pageant system.  So from its inception, the Miss Universe Organization has been focused on business and bathing suits.  That it’s most popular says a lot about what our society values.

Although this year’s pageant should have had a different result, if pageant rumors were to be believed.  It had been suggested for months on pageant discussion boards that Miss China would take the crown. Not only is she a beautiful women and model, but Trump had allegedly hand-picked her, wanting to pursue more business interests in China. Could Miss China’s placement as the fourth-runner-up tell us something about The Donald’s next business venture? Unlikely, but stranger things have happened.

As a loyal pageant watcher, Miss Angola was certainly a worthy competitor and she is a beautiful winner—even if Trump doesn’t start building high-rises in Luanda.  But I’m still disappointed that the 89 contestants didn’t wear their “national costumes” during the parade of nations.  Here’s winner Miss Angola in hers:

But think how much more fun the night would have been if you had seen costume winner Miss Panama appear live in this!

My tacky national costume award goes to Miss Chile:

Who is your favorite?

The Summer of the Stage Mothers

This has certainly been the summer of stage mothers-- at least on television.

We have the Dance Moms on Lifetime, who continue to bring the crazy. If anything, it's ramping up as the Abby Lee Dance Company prepares for its big "nationals" in Tahoe. Stay tuned for a smackdown with Crazy Cathy from Candy Apples... I can't wait! In the meantime, the moms have moved on from sniping at one another to fighting with the dance teacher. In the latest episode (Episode 9: From Ballerinas to Showgirls) mom Christi confronts dance teacher Abby about her favoritism and not treating her daughter Chloe like "a human being." Mom Kelly has a meltdown over solo costumes, gets into a huge fight with teacher Abby, and pulls her daughter Paige's number from the competition. You can watch this, and more, by clicking here.

While Dance Moms has certainly produced some cringe-worthy stage mom moments this summer, they still can't approach TLC-levels of stage mother craziness.  So, not surprisingly, Toddlers & Tiaras moms still win the crown (though some of the mothers from TLC's Outrageous Kid Parties *almost* take the cake-- pun intended). From the mother reliving her own child beauty pageant days by putting her four-year-old in her old Dolly Parton costume, complete with "enhancements" of the bust and bottom, to the mother dressing her three-year-old as Julia Roberts' prostitute character in Pretty Woman, what can you say?

Good for this pageant mom speaking out against the Pretty Woman costume in "Celebrity Wear" in a very articulate way, acknowledging existing criticisms of child beauty pageants. Notice her daughter is dressed in an age-appropriate Shirley Temple costume, so at least she walks the walk. That said, part of me wonders if some women are being more outrageous to try to get their children media attention. The Pretty Woman mom has made numerous national media appearances in the past week. Sure, she's being strongly criticized, but perhaps that was her plan all along? We know that much of Dance Moms is also staged for the cameras and people are now so savvy about "reality" television that you have to wonder; or maybe I'm just being too hopeful.

While there is always at least a kernel of reality in our reality programming, there is no better exhibit than Kate Gosselin to illustrate just how packaged these shows have become. Kate is perhaps the greatest "stage mother" of our era-- not just for pushing her own kids to be on camera as themselves (a twist to the traditional Momma Rose narrative, since they aren't really "performers)-- but also for presenting herself as the world's greatest "mother."  The change in her own appearance from frumpy frau to yummy mummy is evidence enough of her willingness and ability to literally transform in front of the cameras.  Tomorrow is the series finale for TLC's Kate Plus 8, and it's possible it's not a moment too soon if these children will have a chance at a non-reality/reality-filled life. You only have to read the People Magazine cover story this week to start to comprehend the deep psychological, psychosocial, and sociological effects that growing up in front of the cameras has had on the Gosselin eight, not to mention how they relate to money and view financial stability for their family. These kids have had to work as themselves basically since they were in utero, so hopefully they can eventually make the transition to a non-reality reality.  Then again, twin Mady wants to be a Disney pop star, and Kate seems bully on the idea... And we know how well that usually turns out! (Check out this great Yahoo article on the end of the show, featuring comments by yours truly on the financial repercussions for the Gosselin eight!)

While the end of the Gosselin reality show is the end of an era in many ways, I can't help but wonder if this is just the start of seeing more and more stage mothers on TV doing outrageous things with their kids on camera in the pursuit of celebrity and some fleeting fifteen minutes of fame. What do you think-- is this the apex or the nadir of this trend?