bigbrother

It is time to call BS on the feigned public outrage to the elimination of the first contestant on BBAU14.

On Tuesday, each housemate had to stand behind the person they wanted to remain in the competition and say why they made that decision.  Things became extremely awkward when all but one housemate stood behind the contestant that was eventually eliminated.

Of course by the next morning, there was sanctimonious horror at what had taken place with one academic denouncing it as mobbing and a form of violence.

Really?  A form of violence? Was it cruel?  Yes? Was it abnormal? No.

Competitive reality television holds a mirror (perhaps a distorting carnival one) to society.  It magnifies human behaviour in a hyper-real environment. Newsflash:  People are perfectly horrid to each other.

What is the difference between Tuesday night and PE?  Remember when teams were chosen alternatively when the least athletic kids were always grudgingly picked last as no one wanted to compromise their chance of winning?  It’s essentially the same concept of eliminating the weakest team member/housemate.

The behaviour that was writ large on Tuesday is something through school and sport we are socialised from a very early age to accept.  It’s okay to ostracised if it compromises our ability to win or we don’t like them.

For many people, their exclusion is not so stark or public but people are excluded from the group at work.  They are not invited to coffee  or lunch.  They don’t get the group email.  Do we regard social exclusion in the workplace a form of violence?

Before people drawn their breathe in collective horror about the nature of one housemate’s eviction perhaps they should reflect how they mimic Big Brother in their own life.

Advertisements