Reality Show(Project)

Contents Contents....................................................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 1.............................................................................................................................2 Introduction of Entertainment and Media Industry.............................................................2 1.1 Television.........................................................................................................................12 1.2 Films.................................................................................................................................13 1.3 Radio.................................................................................................................................15 CHAPTER 2...........................................................................................................................18 Introduction of Broadcast Media.......................................................................................18 Evolution................................................................................................................................23 CHAPTER 3...........................................................................................................................26 Introduction of Reality Shows...........................................................................................26 INTRODUCTION- REALITY SHOWS...............................................................................27 REALITY SHOWS IN INDIA..............................................................................................31 FEATURES............................................................................................................................39 TYPES OF REALITY SHOWS............................................................................................40 Channel wise reality shows....................................................................................................42 Impacts of Reality TV on Viewers:.......................................................................................47 Impacts of Reality TV on Participants:..................................................................................47 CHAPTER 4...........................................................................................................................49 Research Methodology .....................................................................................................49 4.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE...............................................................................................50 4.2 RESEARCH DESIGN.....................................................................................................50 4.3 SOURCES OF DATA......................................................................................................51 4.4 SAMPLE DESIGN..........................................................................................................53 4.5 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY...................................................................................54 4.6 HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY ...................................................................................54 CHAPTER 5...........................................................................................................................57 Research Analysis..............................................................................................................57 5.1 GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS..............................................................................................58 5.2 Data analysis.....................................................................................................................68 5.2.1. RANK METHOD....................................................................................................68 5.2.2 Chi-square tests.........................................................................................................70 5.2.3 T – tests.....................................................................................................................88 5.2.4. Factor analysis..........................................................................................................90 ANOVA TEST.......................................................................................................................97 CHAPTER 6.........................................................................................................................108 Findings and Suggestions................................................................................................108 6.1 Awareness of reality shows............................................................................................108 6.2 Frequently watch of reality shows.................................................................................110 6.3 Major Findings by the Researcher.................................................................................111 CHAPTER 7.....................................................................................114 Conclusion........................................................................................................................114 Bibliography.....................................................................................................................115 -1-

CHAPTER 1

Introduction of Entertainment and Media Industry

-2-

Over the last few years, there have been discussions on the Indian entertainment industry being on the verge of take-off, powered

by

breakthroughs, regulatory

new

increasing

initiatives.

entertainment

delivery

content

This

landscape,

platforms is

with

variety

expected more

and to

technological and

favorable

transform

the

entering

and

players

traditional players being forced to adapt or perish. One can already witness changes that have the potential to alter the industry structure.

New delivery platforms and technological breakthroughs: Increasing penetration of new delivery platforms is one of the key d r i v e r s o f t h e m ed i a a n d e n t e r t a i n m e n t i n d u s t r y t o d a y , t h a t h a s the potential to change the way people receive content. These platforms, resulting from fundamental technological Breakthroughs are likely to see most of the action in next few years. For example, the spread of inexpensive and stable storage media will also enable people to store content and view it at their convenience. Some other examples are: •

Introduction of DTH and IP-TV

•

Digital distribution of films

•

Immersive content media like IMAX theatres

•

Coming of age of Satellite Radio and FM Radio

•

Emergence of new technologies like podcasting, etc

Together, these are expected to change the viewing habits of people.

-3-

Increasing content variety: N e w f o r m s o f c o n t e n t w i l l e m e r g e t o c a t e r t o s e l e c t vi e w e r s , a s the industry evolves. Content like community radio and local t e l e v i s i o n , t h a t w e r e u n v i a b l e e a r l i e r , w i l l a l s o em e r g e s t r o n g e r through new delivery formats. Moreover, content innovation will be necessary to sustain the interest of the increasingly jaded urban population. A few instances of rising content diversity are: •

Newer programming categories like reality television,

•

Crossover content in music and films,

•

N i ch e p r o g r a m m i n g o n r a d i o l i k e sp o r t s a n d c o m e d y ,

•

Newer genres like lifestyle television, religion channels, etc.

Regulatory initiatives: The regulatory framework for media is still evolving. Looking at the

policies

announced

by

TRAI,

it

seems

that

a

liberal

framework is likely to be developed in order to allow the industry to flourish. Alongside regulating broadcasting and distribution, it w i l l b e i m p o r t a n t t o c r e a t e s t r o n g e r p r o t e c t i o n m e ch a n i s m s f o r copyrights and royalties. If intellectual property is protected to a fair extent, the industry could capture far greater value, giving its growth rate a significant boost.

-4-

Executive summary: A few examples of such regulatory actions are: •

An

implementable

regulatory

framework

for

introducing

addressability of cable television •

Policy framework for DTH, satellite radio and community radio

•

Migration to a revenue sharing regime in FM radio

•

S u p e r i o r c o p y r i g h t p r o t e c t i o n f o r f i l m s , m u si c a n d h o m e video, etc

The past and the future: The

entertainment

industry

is

thriving

on

the

current

e c o n o m i c u p sw i n g a n d i s cu r r e n t l y e s t i m a t e d a t I N R 2 2 b i l l i o n . D u e t o i t s s h e e r s i z e , t e l e v i s i o n h a s b e e n t h e m ai n d ri v e r f o r t h e industry's growth, contributing 62 percent of the overall industry's growth.

Films

contributed

another

27

percent,

while

other

s e g m e n t s l i k e m u s i c, r a d i o , l i v e e n t e r t a i n m e n t a n d i n t e r a c t i v e gaming constitute the balance 11 percent.

-5-

Growth of the entertainment industry:

Propelled by innovation across its value chain and a series of enabling regulatory actions, the entertainment industry is expected to grow annually at almost 18 percent to reach around INR 588 billion by 2010. However, even with such growth, it could be

just

scratching

the

su r f a c e

of

the

Indian

market's

true

potential. Reaching this targeted growth rate will not be easy for the sector.

Television

sector

has

witnessed

a

si g n i f i c a n t

bit

of

transparency, process orientation and discipline, except for the last-mile which is completely fragmented. The film sector, on the

-6-

o t h e r h a n d , s t i l l r em a i n s r e l a t i v e l y o p a q u e a n d p e r s o n a - d ri v e n . O v e r t h e p a s t f e w y e a r s , t h e f i l m i n d u s t r y h a s m ad e s o m e progress

in

getting

institutional

and

corporatized

funding.

However, the progress on this front has not been as dramatic as had been expected when the institutional funding norms for films were relaxed a few years ago. Even though different sources u n a n i m o u s l y a g r e e t h a t t h e e n t e r t a i n m e n t i n d u s t r y i s a s u n ri s e sector, it has seen no major fund-raising efforts, apart from television

content

and

broadcasting

where

the

impact

of

professionalism and organized financing is evident.

The industry growth drivers: Over the past decade, India has been the second fastest growing economy in the world. In 2004, it grew by 8.2 percent, breaching the psychological 8 percent barrier for the first time. In terms of purchasing power parity, it is already the fourth largest economy i n t h e w o r l d . M o s t m aj o r g l o b a l c o m p a n i e s a r e o f t h e o p i n i o n t h a t it will become a key market in the years to come. As the Indian economy continues growing, the Indian middle class will also expand significantly. Compared to other nations, the 300 million strong Indian Middle

class

allocates

a

higher

percentage

of

its

monthly

expenditure on entertainment. The increasing consumerism of m i d d l e - cl a s s I n d i a i s s e e n f r o m t h e s h a r p g r o w t h i n t h e s a l e s f o r various

products

like

automobiles,

color

television

sets

and

mobile phones and the burgeoning increase in credit cards and personal loans. There is an increase in the direct consumer spends on entertainment and advertising revenues have also been on the rise. With the average Indian getting younger, and

-7-

hence more likely to spend on nonessentials, the entertainment industry has the potential to grow explosively in the future.

The forthcoming metamorphosis: The entertainment industry is now at an inflection point. The earlier phase of growth has run its course. Now the industry is ready to enter a second stage of growth powered by the twin engines of technology (availability of quality infrastructure and the

accelerated

penetration

of

enabling regulatory environment.

-8-

digital

connectivity)

and

an

A panoramic view: The coming of age of the television sector has been the primary driver of the growth that the entertainment industry has seen over the last decade. The private sector enterprise seen across the television value chain in the nineties drove the sector to newer heights. It is now the most important component of the entertainment

industry,

contributing

over

60

percent

of

its

revenues. It is expected to continue powering the industry in the digital era, through various innovations like DTH, interactive t e l e v i s i o n , e t c . T h o u g h i n r e v e n u e t e r m s, f i l m s c o n t r i b u t e j u s t 2 7 p e r c e n t o f t h e e n t e r t a i n m e n t i n d u s t r y, i t s v i s i b i l i t y a n d i m p a c t i s m u c h m o r e t h a n t h i s f i g u r e s u g g e s t s . I t i s a l s o a m aj o r d r i v e r f o r o t h e r s e c t o r s l i k e m u si c , l i v e e n t e r t a i n m e n t a n d t e l e v i s i o n . I t w a s accorded the status of an industry in 2000. Since then, some progress

has

been

made

in

developing

transparency

and

professionalism in this sector. M u s i c, r a d i o a n d o t h e r e m e r g i n g s e g m e n t s l i k e a n i m a t i o n , i n t e r a c t i v e g am i n g a n d l i v e e n t e r t a i n m e n t t o g e t h e r a c c o u n t f o r remaining 12-13 percent of entertainment revenue.

-9-

Piracy and revenue losses at the last-mile are the bane of t h e e n t e r t a i n m e n t i n d u s t r y . T h e y p r e v e n t t h e ri g h t f u l o w n e r s o f the content from realizing its full value. All sectors of the industry, except radio, suffer from these twin predicaments in s o m e w a y o r t h e o t h e r . C u r r e n t l y , s u ch l o s s e s a r e e s t i m a t e d a t INR

4.3

billion,

w h i ch

amounts

to

over

40

percent

of

the

i n d u s t r y ' s t o t a l r e v e n u e s . W h i l e su c h l o s s e s a r e e x p e c t e d t o continue for another two to three years, a reversal is expected e v e n t u a l l y a s a r e s u l t o f a c o m b i n a t i o n o f a t e c h n o l o g y p u sh ( w i t h a w i d e r e p e r t o i r e o f f i l m a n d m u si c b e c o m i n g a v a i l a b l e t h r o u g h a variety of legitimate and convenient platforms and options) and a demand pull (with increased internet penetration and the advent of broadband).

Porter’s Five Forces Analysis of Entertainment Industry B a r g a i ni n g P o w e r o f C o n s um e r ( H i g h )  Consumer can switch channels  Increased globalization

- 10 -

 Availability

of

a

variety

of

alternative

entertainment Threat of New Entrants (Low)  High sunk costs  H i g h c a p i t a l r e q u i r em e n t  Difficult access to distribution C o m p e ti t i v e n e s s w i th i n t h e I n d us t r y (H i g h )  Highly Fragmented Industry  High Fixed Cost  Highly perishable products  Highly diversified rivals B a r g a i ni n g P o w e r o f S up p l i e r s ( L o w )  Decreasing bargaining power of suppliers  Increasing number of content providers T h r e a t o f S ub s t i t ut e s  Film Industry  Significant sporting events like World Cups  Significant cultural events  Print media  Internet

- 11 -

sources

of

1.1 Television With total revenues of INR 139 billion, television is the goliath of the entertainment industry. It is now ready to advance to the next stage of its evolution, grasping the opportunities p r e s e n t e d b y t h e d i g i t a l a g e , w h i c h w i l l c om p l e t e l y ch a n g e t h e home entertainment landscape. In the process, it is expected to continue its rapid growth and reach INR 371 billion by 2010. S o m e o f t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l ch a n g e s a r e : A d d i t i o n a l d i s tr i b ut i o n pl a t f o r m s : The last-mile of television distribution will see a lot of action in the near future due to entry of new Direct to Home (DTH) broadcasters, broadcasting

Internet services

Protocol using

based

Digital

Television

S u b s c ri b e r

(IP-TV),

Line

(DSL)

technologies, etc. They will also give broadcasters direct access to

consumers

by

enabling

them

with

the

ability

to

provide

customized value-added services, such as video on demand. P r e s e n t l y t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s u b s c ri p t i o n r e v e n u e s i s h e a v i l y skewed

towards

the

cable

operator

because

of

lack

of

t r a n s p a r e n c y i n t h e d e c l a r a t i o n o f s u b s c ri b e r s b y t h e L o c a l C a b l e Operator to the pay television broadcaster. The introduction of these

new

platforms

and

the

consequent

addressability

facilitate a more equitable distribution of revenues.

- 12 -

will

More entrants in niche genres offering additional content variety to the viewer.Niche genres have significantly strengthened their value proposition and more entrants are expected in spaces like animation, business and lifestyle, among others.

C o n d uc i v e a n d l i b e r a l i zi n g r e g ul a t o r y i n t e r v e n t i o n : A beginning has already been made through an amendment of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act. This is expected to deliver addressability in the currently fragmented distribution market, thereby increasing broadcaster's shares of revenue and encouraging greater participation.

1.2 Films Though films contribute just 27 percent to the entertainment revenues, they form the heart of this industry. Indian films, especially

the

m ai n s t r e a m

Hindi

film

industry

( B o l l yw o o d )

d o m i n a t e s e g m e n t s l i k e m u si c a n d l i v e e n t e r t a i n m e n t a s w e l l a s television,

where

popular

films

and

film-based

programmes

a t t r a c t t h e h i g h e s t vi e w e r s h i p . 0 0 2 0 Compared to television, this sector is rather unorganized a n d i n d i vi d u a l i s t i c, w i t h a l o w l e v e l o f d i s c i p l i n e a n d p r o c e s s o r i e n t a t i o n . T h i s, a l o n g w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t i t as

an

industry

as

late

as

2000,

was not recognized

restricted

its

access

to

institutional funding and forced it to rely on other sources that c h a r g e d u s u ri o u s r a t e s o f i n t e r e s t .

- 13 -

In the recent years, though there has been a distinct shift in the mindset and the willingness to tap institutional debt and equity funds. Some of India's largest corporate houses have entered this sector and large international studios are reportedly evaluating

the

Indian

opportunity.

However,

the

lack

of

transparency and discipline is preventing them from fully tapping this opportunity. The film industry is at a cusp in its evolutionary p a t h . I f c o n v e n t i o n a l p l a y e r s a r e a b l e t o i m p l em e n t t h e ch a n g e s needed to unlock its growth potential, the second phase of corporate and institutional growth could see the industry grow at a r o u n d 1 6 p e r c e n t a n n u a l l y t o r e a c h I N R 1 4 3 b i l l i o n i n si x y e a r s . T h e I n d i a n m u si c s e c t o r i s q u i t e u n i q u e c o m p a r e d t o o t h e r g l o b a l m a r k e t s . S o n g s f r o m n e w H i n d i f i l m s c o m p ri s e 4 0 p e r c e n t of the total industry revenue and the box office popularity of the film typically drives sales. In India, growing piracy and free downloads

have

reduced

m u si c

buying.

Consequently,

the

i n d u s t r y h a s sh r u n k t o a r o u n d I N R 1 0 b i l l i o n f r o m a r o u n d I N R 1 3 . 5 b i l l i o n , t h r e e y e a r s a g o . T h e si l v e r l i n i n g i s t h a t t h o u g h music buying from legitimate sources might have reduced, the d e l i v e r y o f m u si c t h r o u g h n e w f o r m a t s , l i k e F M r a d i o , i n t e r n e t and mobile phones has actually increased interest in music. The f u t u r e g r o w t h i s l i k e l y t o c om e f r o m n o n - p h y si c a l f o r m a t s l i k e d i g i t a l d o w n l o a d s r o y a l t y i n c om e , ri n g t o n e s , e t c . T h e r o l l o u t o f additional distribution platforms like DTH, digital cable and IP-TV with the growing popularity of large format retail stores will c r e a t e m a n y m o r e c h a n n e l s s e l l i n g m u si c . B a s e d o n t h e c u r r e n t t r e n d s , t h e i n d u s t r y i s e x p e c t e d t o g r o w o n l y m od e r a t e l y t o I N R 1 3 b i l l i o n i n 2 0 1 0 . W i t h t h e ri g h t t e c h n o l o g y a n d r e g u l a t o r y p u s h

- 14 -

to curb piracy, it has the potential of achieving a double digit growth.

1.3 Radio Though

radio

reaches

out

to

99

percent

of

India's

population and is considered to be the most cost-effective mass medium,

it was

only

recently

that

private

participants

were

allowed to enter the space with a view to unlocking the latent c o m m e r c i a l p o t e n t i a l . W i t h p r i v a t e F M r a d i o ch a n n e l s r o l l i n g o u t in several cities, the long stagnant advertisement revenues from radio have doubled in two years. Compared with other nations, r a d i o cu r r e n t l y h a s a v e r y s m al l s h a r e o f t h e t o t a l a d v e r t i s i n g p i e in India. This is indicative of the promise it holds if the current and proposed licensees are allowed to migrate from the current stifling and unviable licence fee structure to a revenue sharing regime, and if foreign direct investment is allowed. Going forward, enabling regulation that allows radio to develop

in

its

fledgling

years

and

technology-driven

policy

initiatives like introduction of satellite radio can help it grow exponentially. Additionally, with the introduction of new genres in programming with tailored content, the numbers of listeners are l i k e l y t o i n c r e a s e ; a n d r a d i o c o u l d p r o v i d e a n e f f i c i e n t m e c h a n i sm to reach out to niche consumer segments.

E m e r g i ng o p p o r t un i t i e s i n e n t e r t a i n m e n t i n d us t r y Apart from the second wave of growth that various sectors of Indian

entertainment

industry

are

- 15 -

set

to

witness,

there

are

e m e r g i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s sp a n n i n g a c r o s s g e n r e s a n d m a r k e t s . Some of the more interesting areas to look out for are:

Ani mati on India's large pool of software talent has made it an appropriate resource base to develop animation and graphics-heavy content. Many

international

organizations

outsource

their

animation

requirements to leading Indian software players. As the industry grows and establishes its quality credentials, India will emerge as a serious animation hub.

Outs ourc ed Produc ti on Faci li ti es W i t h t h e r e l e n t l e s s r i s e i n H o l l yw o o d f i l m b u d g e t s , t h e p r e s s u r e on cost control is also increasing. India can tap this opportunity b y o f f e r i n g H o l l yw o o d a n o v e r a l l l o w c o s t s t r u c t u r e c o m b i n e d w i t h high-quality technical talent and production facilities. However, significant

investment

in

infrastructure

and

equipment

are

required to be made before this becomes a reality.

Organi zed Home Videos The Indian market for home video entertainment – VHS tape, VCD or DVD, is largely unorganized with mainly local outlets. A demand for quality and convenience remains to be exploited by large organized retail players, who could leverage economies of scale in content procurement and distribution.

- 16 -

Lei sure entertai nment like theme parks Till date, outdoor entertainment in India has seen limited action w i t h f e w s i g n i f i c a n t i n v e s t m e n t s . T h i s i s ch a n g i n g a s l e a d i n g international players are exploring the Indian opportunity. The challenge here will be providing a cost-effective and profitable value proposition to the Indian consumer.

Li ve entertai nment: The live entertainment industry in India is largely unorganized w i t h f e w p l a y e r s h a v i n g t h e r e q u i si t e c ri t i c a l m a s s . T h e g r a d u a l reduction of entertainment tax across states will make the sector more attractive, drawing in large corporate and multinationals. This is likely to result in increased marketing investments and creation of world-class infrastructure like convention centers. Going

forward,

there

could

be

collaboration

with

other

c o n s t i t u e n t s o f t h e e n t e r t a i n m e n t i n d u s t r y, l i k e f i l m s , t e l e v i s i o n a n d m u si c .

- 17 -

CHAPTER 2

Introduction of Broadcast Media

- 18 -

History Television in India has been in existence since four decades. For the first 17 years transmission was mainly in black & w h i t e . T e l e v i s i o n h a s c om e t o t h e f o r e f r o n t o n l y i n t h e p a s t 2 1 years and more so in the past 13. There were initially two ignition points: the first in the eighties when colour TV was introduced by state-owned broadcaster Doordarshan (DD) timed with the 1982 Asian Games which India hosted. The second spark came in the early nineties with the broadcast of satellite TV by foreign programmers like CNN followed by Star TV and a little later by d o m e s t i c c h a n n e l s su c h a s Z e e T V a n d S u n T V i n t o I n d i a n homes. Prior to this, Indian viewers had to make do with DD's chosen fare which was dull, non-commercial in nature, directed towards

only

education

and

socio-economic

development.

Entertainment programme were few and far between. And when t h e s o l i t a r y f e w s o a p s l i k e H u m L o g ( 1 9 8 4 ) , a n d m y th o l o g i c a l d r a m a s : R a m a y a n ( 1 9 8 7 - 8 8 ) a n d M a h a b h a r a t (1 9 8 8 - 8 9 ) w e r e televised, millions of viewers stayed glued to their sets.

The

government started taxing cable operators in a bid to generate revenue. The rates varied in the 26 states that go to form India and ranged from 35 per cent upwards. The authorities moved in to regulate the business and a Cable TV Act was passed in 1995. The apex court in the country, the Supreme Court, passed a judgement that the air waves are - 19 -

not the property of the Indian government and any Indian citizen w a n t i n g t o u s e t h e m sh o u l d b e a l l o w e d t o d o s o . T h e g o v e r n m e n t r e a c t e d b y m a ki n g e f f o r t s t o g e t s om e r e g u l a t i o n i n p l a c e b y setting up committees to suggest what the broadcasting law of I n d i a s h o u l d b e, a s t h e s e c t o r w a s s t i l l b e i n g g o v e r n e d b y l a w s which were passed in 19th century India. A broadcasting bill was drawn up in 1997 and introduced in parliament.

Cabl e tel evisi on The

immediate

reaction

of

anyone

taking

a

look

at

the

penetration of cable TV in India would be that there are pots of money

to

be

m ad e .

Cable

operators

charge

a

su b s c r i b e r

anywhere from Rs 50 for a 10-12 channel service to Rs 125-150 a month for a 30-60 channel plus service. Even if we consider that t h e r e a r e j u s t 2 0 m i l l i o n c a b l e T V h om e s i n I n d i a ( w h i c h i s a conservative figure), and that a cable operator on an average g e t s a b o u t R s 1 0 0 p e r su b s c r i b e r , t h e n a t i o n a l m o n t h l y r e v e n u e s work out to Rs 2000 million from cable TV. On an annual basis, the potential revenues work out to Rs 24,000 million (US $600 million). That figure is just the tip of the iceberg, and hence it may look attractive enough to make any western cable operator or

large

Indian

company

to

start

licking

its

ch o p s .

The country is estimated to have anywhere from 30,00060,000 cable operators. A wide range as any but the general opinion is that the figure is closer to the lower number. The number of operators who registered themselves with the post office after the Cable TV Network Regulation Act, 1995 mandated so

is

about

16,000.

The

average

size

of

each

network

is

e s t i m a t e d a t 2 0 0 0 s u b s c ri b e r s i n t h e m a j o r m e t r o s , a b o u t 2 0 0 - 20 -

3 0 0 f o r s m a l l e r t o w n s a n d 5 0 - 1 0 0 f o r ru r a l a r e a s . U n t i l 1 9 9 4 , t h e a v e r a g e s i z e w a s a b o u t o n e - f o u r t h w h a t i t i s n o w f o r u rb a n I n d i a . Most

of

the

networks

had

been

set

up

by

small-time

entrepreneurs and were built without any regulations in place. But

things

have

changed

since

then

with

large

companies

entering the area of networking: The UK-based Hinduja family through a media company they set up with overseas Sindhi i n v e s t o r s I n d u s I n d M e d i a , R u p e r t M u r d o c h a n d Z e e T V p r om o t e r Subhash Chandra through a 50:50 joint venture Siticable, and print media company Business India through BI TV Networks Again the fact that the network was offering a superior cable service—with a cable channel offering local event coverage a n d a n e x c l u si v e H i n d i m o v i e c h a n n e l - - w o r k e d a g a i n s t t h e sm a l l c a b l e o p e r a t o r w h o h a d t o c a v e i n w h e n s u b s c ri b e r s s t a r t e d demanding for it. The Business India group got into the business to ensure carriage for its satellite channel TVi, and also because it saw some potential in cable TV.

Present scenari o The Indian television business is packed with contradictions as of October 1999. On the one hand, it has some 70 million television h o m e s , g i v i n g a vi e w i n g p o p u l a t i o n o f cl o s e t o 4 0 0 m i l l i o n individuals. They have a gaggle-bag of 100 plus channels to choose from, but on the other hand, the infrastructure is so unstable that this choice cannot be converted into a willing purchase.

On the one

hand, Internet

Service Providers

are

threatening to deliver the Net to Indian television viewers, while on the other 90% of Indian TV sets have the capability to receive only 12-16 channels. The authorities make a display of frowning down upon foreign broadcasters but allow them to operate freely - 21 -

i n t h e c o u n t r y . I t h a s a g l u t o f t e l e v i s i o n ch a n n e l s , a s l o w i n g down advertising revenue stream, a gradual opening up of the pay television market, steady but unregulated growth in cable a n d s a t e l l i t e t e l e v i s i o n h o m e s a n d t h e a b s e n c e o f a n y m a ch i n e r y to

track

m i s d em e a n o u r s

and

crack

down

on

violators.

A

broadcasting bill has been pending for almost four years, Kuband DTH television has been stalled by vested interests, and cable TV licensing has not progressed and only a rudimentary Cable TV Network Regulation Act is what governs the massive c a b l e T V o p e r a t o r c om m u n i t y . With nearly 24 million cable and satellite homes, that is about

150

million

viewers,

it

is

a

large

market

which

has

attracted many a channel from overseas. But the channels that attract eyeballs are those that offer dollops of local fare in local languages: state-owned broadcaster Doordrashan, Zee TV, Sony Entertainment, Star Plus, ESPN Star Sports, Sun TV, Raj TV, Eenadu

TV, the local

cable TV operator

ru n

pirated

m o vi e

channel. The English and foreign language channels are niche players

struggling

to

stay

on

their

feet.

English

language

c h a n n e l s d u b b e d i n l o c a l l a n g u a g e s a r e f a r i n g m u ch b e t t e r . S o m e o f t h e E n g l i sh a n d f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e s e r v i c e s l i k e D e u t s c h e W e l l e TV, RTM, TV5, Saudi TV, are pretty irrelevant to Indian viewers but they are still being beamed down by hopeful telecasters. The l i s t o f c h a n n e l s w h i ch a r e w a t c h e d c a n b e w h i t t l e d d o w n t o a b o u t 50. Most of these are transmitted via satellite; the only terrestrial broadcaster operating is the state-owned broadcaster DD, which has a bouquet of 19 channels using both modes of delivery. With ad

revenues

slowing

down,

programmers

are

attempting

to

generate revenues by charging cable operators carriage fees. But that has not worked successfully excepting in the case of cinema

- 22 -

a n d s p o r t s p r o g r a m m i n g . N i c h e c h a n n e l s su c h a s D i s c o v e r y , National

Geographic,

Animal

Planet

c o n t i n u e t o d o s o f o r q u i t e s om e t i m e .

are

bleeding

and

will

They are also migrating

towards digital transmissions which enable them to eke out savings in transponder rentals and deliver better quality of sound and picture. Almost 20-30 channels are broadcasting in digital mode. Many more are expected in the near future with existing language players launching second channels and introducing channels

in other

languages

like Marathi, Gujarati,

Punjabi,

Telugu, and Bengali.

F ut ur e s c e n a r i o

Evolution The Indian TV industry seems to be evolving from three different stages and would reach a point where conversion of TV into a PC and into a telephone will not be distinct anymore. As

- 23 -

the market matures the television wars will first compete on price in which mode of connectivity is going to play an important role and then on content and quality of picture and sound. Each of these stages has been studied in detail, keeping in view the initial investment and the feasibility in the Indian context

1. S t a g e O n e - I t i s m o r e t h a n o b v i o u s t h a t s o o n e r o r l a t e r C A S will

be

rolled

out

present

form

in

considering more

its

advantages

customized

over

offering,

the more

t r a n s p a r e n c y a n d b e t t e r m a r k e t p r i c i n g ( D e m a n d a n d su p p l y o f i n d i vi d u a l c h a n n e l s c a n b e e a s i l y m e a s u r e d ) . C A S w i l l involve an initial investment which can be broken down into monthly installments. 2. S t a g e t w o - D i r e c t t o H om e ; h o l d s d i s t i n c t a d v a n t a g e i n terms of low involvement by the consumer with the cable operator (E.g. problems of power failure and poor picture quality). Direct to home model operations which uses direct satellite communication and major players like Tata, Zee & R e l i a n c e h a v e i n v e s t e d i n t h i s T h i s m od e l s u p p o r t s t w o w a y connectivity as well as a reach to any corner of India, thus increasing

the

connectivity

in

the

non

u rb a n

areas

(successful launch of igo TV, with DD direct package). DTH also is a beneficiary of content makers as it would reduce p i r a c y . T h e h i n d r a n c e t o a c c e p t a n c e o f t h i s m od e l b y t h e c o n s u m e r s i s t h e i n i t i a l i n v e s t m e n t t o b e i n cu r r e d b y h i m , h i g h s w i t c h i n g c o s t a n d l e s s am o u n t o f f l e x i b i l i t y ( i n t e r m s o f the preferred content). However we feel that there would be a gradual shift towards acceptance of DTH once CAS is rolled out.

- 24 -

3. S t a g e

Three-

Convergence,

with

a

rapid

change

in

technology and everything from camera, phone and radio becoming one, possibility of convergence of telephone, internet and TV into one in Indian context is no longer a dream. IPTV has been at the fore front of this convergence and

has

done very

well

in

the

developing

markets

of

Malaysia and Taiwan. After about 20 years the Indian consumer will no longer be satisfied only with streaming content

(which

is

being

directly

broadcast),

but

would

d e m a n d i n t e r a c t i v e - n e s s a n d o p t i o n s l i k e cu s t o m i z i n g h i s TV viewing on his choices to individual programs at his convenient time. For ex. A consumer would be able to buy a stock news from CNBC, and headlines from Aaj Tak, sop operas from Star while songs from MTV. With massive investment

already

being

m ad e

in

bandwidth

&

infrastructure setup; a set of new players in TV market would emerge mainly the Telecoms & ISPs. So Hutch TV m i g h t j u s t n o t b e a n a d v e r t i s e m e n t , b u t c a n a l s o t u rn i n t o reality.

- 25 -

CHAPTER 3

Introduction of Reality Shows

- 26 -

INTRODUCTION- REALITY SHOWS T h e i n g r e d i e n t s o f a n i d e a l r e a l i t y sh o w i s s i m p l e , I t m u s t a p p e a l to all. It is a craft; it is a drama that unfolds in front of people. T h e r e i s n o d o u b t t h a t t h e s e m u si c a l r e a l i t y sh o w s p r o v i d e a strong

platform

to

young

talents

who

don't

get

the

right

o p p o r t u n i t y t o s h o w t h e i r s k i l l s . A l t h o u g h o u r c o u n t r y i s n o sh o r t of talent what we need is to provide the right platform and direction to these up-coming talents, which these talent hunts are providing. Most of the Indian television channels are telecast with different categories of reality shows, like celebrity reality, prank reality, talent hunts, makeovers, Indian Idol, Nach Baliey, MTV R o a d i e s a n d d a t i n g sh o w s . R e a l i t y s h o w s h a s e m e r g e d a s a n e w form

of

concept

for

the

viewers

with

including

unscripted

dramatic or humorous situations, documentary on actual events, and featuring ordinary people instead of professional celebrities. These realities shows means to search for the talent like acting, singing and dancing. Most of the reality shows have a voting system where general people select the most talented candidate. Reality shows are comes from USA. The mother of this concept is European countries have given sizeable contribution as well. When in the year 1993 reality shows comes no one thought that t h e o n e d a y su c h r e a l i t y s h o w s w o u l d b e l i f e l i n e o f d i p p i n g o f t h e TV

channels.

Reality

Shows

are

fast

replacing

the

daily

‘daughter-in-law versus mother-in-law’ soaps television. The high - 27 -

T R P s o f t h e r e a l i t y s h o w s m ad e t h e m t h e n u m b e r o n e c h o i c e o f e v e r y p o s s i b l e t e l e v i s i o n ch a n n e l . F r o m T a l e n t - H u n t s h o w s , t o d a n c e d r a m a s , t o a c t i n g - f l i c k s , t a l k s h o w s , c h a t - sh o w s c o o k e r y s h o w s , a r t a n d c r a f t s h o w s, a s t r o l o g y s h o w s t h e l i s t i s e n d l e s s . A l l s u ch sh o w s h a v e e n g u l f e d ( f l o w o v e r a n d s w a m p ) m o s t o f t h e television space and they have a strong audience. Anything that s t r i k e s t h e em o t i o n a l c h o r d i s a n i n s t a n t h i t i n o u r c o u n t r y . T h e reason for this is that we Indians are high on the emotional quotient and every Indian (even the most practical one) has an e m o t i o n a l s o u l h i d d e n s om e w h e r e . T h e s u c c e s s o f r e a l i t y s h o w s in India can be attributed to a great extent to this weakness of o u r s . A p a r t f r o m t h i s , t h e r e l i e f t h a t t h e s e sh o w s p r o v i d e f r o m t h e s a a s - b a h u s o a p s , w h i c h c u r r e n t l y d om i n a t e t e l e v i s i o n , i s a n o t h e r reason for their immense popularity.

The reality shows perch on a very strong emotional content which makes their connection with the audience very strong. This strong emotional connect also subconsciously translates to a large extent with the product being marketed. Reality shows are either for entertainment or infotainment. They do not appear to be

marketing

vehicles.

Yet

they

market

very

strongly.

The

product being marketed becomes a part of the entertainment and does not appear as if it is being marketed. Take instance the now very popular method of marketing film through reality shows. When company release of a new film they promote film through the reality shows. Give money / sponsor the particular shows and p r o m o t e t h e f i l m . F o r e x a m p l e i n si n g i n g r e a l i t y s h o w i n v i t e s t h e actors of the film and promotes the film or gave gift as songs CD to participants. Reality shows have a strong reflection of the dreams, aspirations, struggle and emotions of the common-man.

- 28 -

H e n c e p e o p l e t e n d t o r e l a t e v e r y s t r o n g l y t o t h e ch a r a c t e r s o f such shows. Reality shows are mostly family catchers. Grandparents, parents, children all watch such shows mostly together. The formats of most shows are such that they attract audience across age-groups and genders. Hence reality shows provide an ideal platform to send a strong message to the entire family at o n e g o a n d m a k e t h e m t o t h i n k a n d d i s cu s s t o g e t h e r a b o u t s h o w s o r p r o d u c t . T h e f o r m a t s o f t h e r e a l i t y sh o w s h a v e a b u i l t - i n q u i c k response – seeking factor from the audience. Most of the reality shows demand conscious as well as subconscious

involvement

of

the

audience.

The

conscious

involvement is in terms of getting an opportunity to vote for their favourite participant, or to make a live call and chat with their favourite celebrity or make a own

views

in

a

talk

show

telephone call and pour – in one’s and

so

on.

The

su b c o n s c i o u s

involvement is in form of living through the woes or joy of the p a r t i c i p a n t c om m e n t b y a j u d g e o r a c e l e b r i t y e t c . The

realities

in

India

have

opened

floodgates

for

the

marketers. Everyone is making a lot of money and no one seems to be complaining. After all it is giving gains to everyone. The various television channels exploited the potential of reality shows

and

saw

a

huge

surge

in

popularity.

‘Kaun

Banega

C r o r e p a t i , ’ I n d i a ’ s t a k e o n ‘ Wh o W a n t s t o B e a M i l l i o n a i r e , ’ catapulted Star TV to the number one position, which it enjoys. S i m i l a r l y, S o n y ’ s p o p u l a r i t y s a w a h u g e r i s e a f t e r i t l a u n c h e d I n d i a n Id o l , a n a d a p t a t i o n o f a h i t B r i t i s h r e a l i t y s h o w . I t w a s reality television that wrote the destiny of television channel Star O n e . T h e t w o r e a l i t y sh o w s , T h e G r e a t I n d i a n L a u g h t e r C h a l l e n g e and Nach Baliye, are to a great extent responsible for the popularity that Star One has got.

- 29 -

R e a l i t y t e l e v i s i o n i s a w i n - w i n si t u a t i o n f o r e v e r y o n e , b e i t c o n t e s t a n t s , c h a n n e l s o r t h e vi e w e r s . T h e h i g h T R P s t h a t t h e s e hows Command

explains

the

advantage

they

have

for

television

channels. F o r t h e v i e w e r s , t h e y a r e r e f r e s h i n g c h a n g e f r o m t h e s om n o l e n t Saas- Bahu dramas. The biggest gainers, however, are the contestants who are provided with the right platform to showcase their talent. There is a lot of untapped talent in our country and t h e s e sh o w s b y e x t e n d i n g t h e i r r e a c h t o sm a l l c i t i e s p r o v i d e a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o b ri n g o u t t h i s h i d d e n t a l e n t . A ch e f f r o m C h am b a managed to reach the final round in Zee TV’s Sa Re Ga Ma Pa. In Star One’s Lakme fashion house, 16 aspiring fashion designers strived to create a design to win an assignment with Donatella at the house of Versace - a lifetime opportunity for any beginner. T h e s e sh o w s g i v e a n i n s t a n t r e c o g n i t i o n t o t h e c o n t e s t a n t s . A c h a n c e t o s h o w c a s e t h e i r t a l e n t o n su c h a b i g p l a t f o r m a n d i n front

of

such

esteemed

judges

is

something

for

which

any

struggler can die. Reality television can provide them with this lifetime opportunity. The which make us all, feel that any other talent is worthless unless it can be taken to the stage. The worst s e e m s t o b e t h e a d d i t i o n o f ch i l d r e n t o t h e s e sh o w s . A p a r t f r o m the very obvious labour of shooting these shows, the most rest, of course, depends on their talent. Reality TV is new mantra of television producers and executives. The times are a changing and the buzzword today is reality shows. These shows are all about format and television programme producers see a huge opportunity in India for them.

- 30 -

Kaun Banega Crorpati , Amul Star Voice of India on Star plus and Indian Idol on Sony TV and Sa Re Ga Ma Pa on Zee TV it has been proven that the formats are huge success in India.Channel and Producers get more from these reality shows because more people’s a r e i n t e r e s t e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n r e a l i t y sh o w s a n d a l s o t h e s e shows Makes history like Amul Star Voice of India, Indian Idol and Sa Re Ga Ma Pa etc. Then

there

are

the

glitzy

talent

s h o w s,

mostly

si n g i n g

or

dancingdisturbing issue is the unearthiness of dance, crude choices

of

songs

and

impolite

costumes

for

children

aged

between 5 and 10. These shows (apart from becoming platforms for movies to be publicized) also produce talent which very soon goes into anonymity.

REALITY SHOWS IN INDIA The reality television craze has not only hit America, but the entire world and India is no exception. The first reality show in I n d i a w a s o n C h a n n e l V a n d w a s a “m a k i n g o f t h e b a n d ” sh o w a n d i t o p e n e d t h e d o o r f o r t h e s e r e a l i t y sh o w s : Most Popular Reality Shows on Indian Television

- 31 -

1 ) B i g B os s

Big Boss is the Indian version of America’s “Big Brother.” The show features fourteen celebrities who live in the same house for three months and have all their movements filmed. As in “Big Brother,” the houseguests have to perform certain tasks. But, in Big Boss, the houseguests “gamble” on their tasks, gaining m o n e y i f t h e y w i n b u t l o s i n g m on e y i f t h e y f a i l a t t h e t a s k . O n e houseguest is taken into the Confession Room each week to nominate two houseguests to evict then the viewers vote. 2) Roadies

Roadies is a very popular MTV India reality show that is now in its fifth season. The show features 13 contestants who are c h o s e n b y Ju d g e s R a g h u R am ( t h e e x e c u t i v e p r o d u c e r o f t h e show) and VJ Nikhil Chinappa after a round of auditions. There is drama and high energy on the show as the contestants’ race from one destination to another, performing tasks along the way. Contestants are eliminated along the way until there is one Roadie, who wins the grand prize of Rs 500,000. This season, - 32 -

t h e s h o w w e n t I n t e r n a t i o n a l vi s i t i n g su c h d e s t i n a t i o n s a s B a n g k o k and Malaysia. 3) Splitsvilla

Another MTV India series, Splitsvilla, is India’s first romance reality show. It features two guys (from Roadies 4.0 and Roadies 5 . 0 ) h u n t i n g f o r l o v e a n d t h e y h a v e 2 0 g i rl s f r o m w h i c h t o c h o o s e ! The contestants live in a villa in beautiful Goa. They go on dates a n d m i n g l e a t p a r t i e s , w i t h t h e g i rl s u si n g t h e i r w i t s a n d s e x i n e s s t o t r y t o w i n t h e h e a r t s o f o n e o f t h e g u y s . T h e g i rl s h a v e t o perform tasks on each episode and those that don’t measure up a r e e l i m i n a t e d . T h e t a g l i n e f o r t h e sh o w i s “ W h e r e L o v e i s W a r . ”

4 ) M a h a y a tr a - 33 -

The Show 12 families embark on this Mahayatra where they compete against each other on the ultimate journey of a Hindu’s life – a journey of the 4 Dhams. This journey spans the length and breadth of the nation covering all the key religious and s p i r i t u a l c e n t e r s . 1 2 o f f - s p r i n g s w i l l s t r e t c h t h em s e l v e s a n d s h o w the nation how far they will go in order to fulfill their parent’s dream of completing the Char Dham Yatra. Mahayatra is the modern day interpretation of centuries old tale of Shravan Kumar – the ideal son. 5) Lift Kara De

M o t h e r o f a l l r e a l i t y sh o w s o n I n d i a n t e l e v i s i o n – 2 0 o f I n d i a ’ s Biggest Super-Stars will be on one platform. Each week will f e a t u r e 1 S u p e r - S t a r a n d t h e i r b i g g e s t f a n a n d l i v e s w i l l ch a n g e . - 34 -

H o s t e d b y o n e o f I n d i a ’ s f i n e s t d i r e c t o r s – K a r a n Jo h a r , t h i s “ U n i q u e , I n d i g e n o u s ” f o r m a t w i l l g i v e h o p e a n d l i f t t h e sp i r i t s o f t h e e n t i r e n a t i o n . Mu m b a i : B o l l y w o o d d i r e c t o r c u m a n c h o r K a r a n J o h a r i s m a k i n g a c o m e b a c k o n sm a l l s c r e e n w i t h h i s n e w sh o w Lift Kara De.

6 ) A m ul M us i c k a Ma h a M uq a b a l a

This will truly be the Clash of the Titans where the star singers of India, leading their own team, will clash against each other to m a k e t h e i r t e a m s u p r em e . T h e y w i l l h a v e u n d e r t h e i r w i n g , 3 singers from Indian Singing Talent Hunts who have already won t h e h e a r t s o f t h e p e o p l e . Jo i n i n g t h i s p o w e r - p a c k e d t e a m w i l l b e 1 new singer each handpicked by the singer. T h e s e s i x t e a m s w i l l vi e f o r t h e t i t l e o f Mu s i c K a M a h a Muqqabla. Every episode will be a war between two teams. The other four captains will be the judges for the day. Also acting as neutral judges would be 2 Bollywood personalities. Added to this would be the scores given by the live audience through the scoring

pads

provided

to

- 35 -

them

at

the

ground.

7) Dance India Dance

Dance India Dance is a reality dance show which is aired on Indian satellite television channel Zee TV. The show is produced b y U T V S o f t w a r e C om m u n i c a t i o n s a n d i s k n o w n t o b e I n d i a ’ s biggest dance reality show until present. The show is to be choreographed

by

some

of

the

most

popular

Indian

c h o r e o g r a p h e r s , su c h a s T e r r a n c e L e w i s , R em o D ’ S o u z a a n d Geeta Kapoor.

8 ) R a h ul D ul h a n i y a L e J a y e g a

- 36 -

Rahul Dulhaniya le jayega is a reality show which displays Rahul m a h a j a n a s t h e b r i d e g r o o m . E i g h t g i rl s f o u g h t a m o n g e a c h o t h e r to woo him in different ways. The girl who fits in the entire c r i t e r i o n s e t b y R a h u l m ah a j a n w o u l d b e c o m e h i s b r i d e . R u p a G a n g u l y s u c c e s s f u l l y w o n t h e s h o w a n d i s n o w m a r ri e d t o R a h u l mahajan 9 ) E m o t i o n a l A ty a c h a r

‘ E m o t i o n a l A t y a c h a r ’ b r i n g s r a w em o t i o n t o T V l i k e n e v e r b e f o r e . As one partner’s actions are caught on hidden cameras, the other i s w a t c h i n g w h a t h a p p e n s . I f i t a l l g e t s t o o m u ch , t h e r e i s a b u t t o n w h i c h h e o r s h e c a n p r e s s d u ri n g t h e l i v e s t r e a m i n g t o bring a halt to the proceedings, then leave the studio and meet h i s o r h e r p a r t n e r . T h e b i g g e s t q u e s t i o n i s w h i ch w a y t h e p e n d u l u m w i l l sw i n g - w i l l t r u e l o v e c o n q u e r a l l .

- 37 -

10) Aap Ki Kachehri Kiran Ke Saath

A f i r s t o f i t s k i n d o n I n d i a n t e l e v i s i o n , t h e sh o w o f f e r s o p e n h e a r i n g s o f c i v i l d i s p u t e s a n d a c o m p a s s i o n a t e y e t f i rm a n d l a w f u l m ed i a t i o n a n d a r b i t r a t i o n b y D r . K i r a n B e d i . E a c h e p i s o d e w i l l s e e d i sp u t a n t s b r i n g i n g f o r t h t h e i r c o n f l i c t s , s t a t i n g a n d arguing their complaints and demands themselves. As the human s t o r i e s u n f o l d , c om m o n p r e d i c am e n t s a n d r e a l d i l e m m a s w i l l b e laid

bare.

From

calm

reasoning,

heated

arguments

to

raw

emotional outbursts - helplessness, anger, despair, and often, relief – Aap Ki Kachehri Kiran Ke Saath encapsulates a variety of human behavior and emotions.

- 38 -

FEATURES 1 . C os t e f fe c t i v e : I t i s p o s s i b l e t o t a p a v e r y l a r g e d e d i c a t e d heterogeneous audience base at very less cost. This makes reality

shows

a

very

cost-effective

marketing

tool

and

consequently has gained popularity.

2 . E m o t i o n a l C o n n e c t : T h i s n o t o n l y a t t r a c t s n e w cu s t o m e r b a s e but keeps the existing customer base loyal because of the emotional- connect.

3 . R e l a t e d n e s s : R e a l i t y sh o w s h a v e a s t r o n g r e f l e c t i o n o f t h e dreams, struggle, and emotions of common-man. Hence people tend to relate very strongly to the characters of such shows. 4. Family Appeal: Reality shows are mostly family catches. G r a n d – p a r e n t s , p a r e n t s , c h i l d r e n a l l w a t c h s u ch s h o w s m o s t l y t o g e t h e r . T h e f o r m a t s o f m o s t s h o w s a r e su c h t h a t t h e y a t t r a c t audience across age groups and genders.

5 . Q ui c k R e s ul t s : T h e f o r m a t s o f t h e r e a l i t y s h o w s h a v e a b u i l t in quick response seeking factor from the audience.

- 39 -

6 . H i g h I n v o l v e m e n t L e v e l : M o s t o f t h e r e a l i t y s h o w s d em a n d c o n s c i o u s a s w e l l a s su b c o n s c i o u s i n v o l v e m e n t o f t h e a u d i e n c e .

TYPES OF REALITY SHOWS

TYPES OF REALITY

D E S C R IP T I O N

FEW EXAMPLES

SHOWS Adventure Fear

Shows based on

MTV Roadies, AXN

Based Shows

adventure sports or

who dares wins India

a c t s t h a t i n v o l v e ri s k

special,

Idea

Khatron ke Khiladi. Celebrity Reality

Reality Shows

Kofee with Karan,

Shows

featuring a celebrity.

Big Boss, Nach B a l i y e , Jh a l a k D i k h l a ja.

C om e d y S h o w s

Dating Shows

Shows mostly

The Great Indian

involving stand-up

Laughter Challenge,

comedians.

C om e d y C i r cu s

Shows which have

MTV’s Romance

live

Reality shows.

dating/speeddating Fashion Based

concept Shows which exhibit

Channel V get

shows

fashion trends

Gorgeous.

- 40 -

Game

Reality shows based

Kaun Banega

Shows

o n g am e s .

Crorepati, Dus Ka Dum, Kya Aap Panchavi

Pass

Se

Tez Hain. Prank Reality

Shows in which

Chuppa Rustam,

practical jokes are

MTV Bakra

played on unsuspecting people whose natural reactions

are

recorded Social Cause

Shows which uphold

NDTV’s

some social cause.

Environment Reality S h o w s, A a p K i Adalat

Job Search Shows

Shows which air live

Clinic All Clear

interviews, live job

Dream Job, CNBC

seekers

Talent Hunt Shows

and Tv-18 &

providers

Naukri.com’s shows.

Shows which

Indian

p ri m a r i l y t a r g e t t o

Ga

spot-out talent.

Ma Pa, Amul Star

Idol,

Sa

Re

Voice of India, Chak De Bacche, K For K i sh o r e .

- 41 -

On the above table there different types of reality shows and their description or concepts and few examples are given. In India people mostly watch Adventure reality shows, Celebrity r e a l i t y s h o w s , c om e d y r e a l i t y s h o w s, G a m e r e a l i t y s h o w s, P r a n k shows and also watch Talent hunt shows. The researcher has project on Talent Hunt shows that is shows which primarily target t o s p o t - o u t t a l e n t . I n t h a t sh o w s t h e r e s e a r c h e r h a s d o i n g S i n g i n g Talent reality show. There are some examples of Singing reality shows as follows . 1). Sa Re Ga Ma Pa 2). Indian Idol 3). Amul Music Maha Muquabla 4). K for Kishore 5).Chak De Bacche etc. R e a l i t y sh o w s a r e e x t r e m e l y p o p u l a r t h e s e d a y s . H o w e v e r , t h e r e i s n o w a y t o g u a r a n t e e su c c e s s . Ju s t b e c a u s e t h e s e s h o w s a r e popular with people it doesn’t mean that anything and everything that ill be served to the audience in the name of reality shows will be relished.

Channel wise reality shows STAR TV •

Aap Ki Kachehri

•

Nach Baliye 4 - 42 -

•

Amul Star Voice Of India

•

ajaa Mahi Vay – Pyaar Ki Agnipareeksha

•

Kya Aap Paanchvi Pass Se Tez Hai?

•

Jo Jeeta Wahi Superstar

•

Khull Ja Sim Sim

•

Kaun Banega Crorepati

•

J o d e e K am a a l K i

•

Antakshari The Great Challenge

SONY TV •

Boogie Woogie

•

Comedy Circus – Chinchpokli To China

•

I n d i a n Id o l 4

•

Jh a l a k D i k h h l a J a a

•

10 Ka Dum

•

Lift Kara de

•

Comedy Ka Badsshah: Hassega India

•

Fame Gurukul

•

Crime Patrol

•

Fear Factor

•

Kaante Ki Takkar – Comedy Circus

•

Deal Ya No Deal

•

Jeeto Chhapar Fad Ke

ZEE TV •

Business Baazigar

- 43 -

•

Kam Ya Zyaada

•

Rock N Roll Family

•

Shabaash India

•

Dance India Dance

COLORS •

Big Boss

•

Dancing Queen

•

Ek Khiladi Ek Haseena

•

Fear Factor – Khatron Ke Khiladi

•

Sajid’s Superstar

STAR ONE •

Bluff Master

•

The Great Indian Laughter Challenge

•

Bol Baby Bol

•

Jet Set Go

•

Koffee With Karan

•

Lead India

•

Nach Baliye

•

Zara Nachke Dikha

REAL CHANNEL •

Sitaron Ko Choona Hai

•

Poker Face - 44 -

•

Sarkaar Ki Duniyasarkaar Ki Duniya

MTV •

Roadies 6.0

•

Splits Villa

•

O n T h e Jo b 2

R e a l i t y sh o w s a r e s o p o p u l a r i n I n d i a .

- 45 -

T h i s i s c om b i n a t i o n s o f t w o t h i n g s t h a t t h e l a r g e am o u n t o f d r a m a a n d s t r o n g em o t i o n a l c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e a u d i e n c e s . M i l l i o n s o f I n d i a n p e o p l e d r e a m t o c o m e i n t o r e a l i t y sh o w s a n d w a n t t o g e t popular. This dream also comes in true with the help of these reality shows/programs. Some people have identified with the dreams, aspirations and struggle of the participants, some have identified themselves with the straight- talking judges, and others h a v e f o u n d a v o i c e t o i d e n t i f y - w i t h i n t h e sh o w s w i t h a s t r o n g social tag. Talent shows have perhaps been the biggest hit among the lot with the exception that KBC hit the jackpot despite of being a quiz show. Reality shows are a big hit today. Few years earlier, “Koun Banega Krorpati” was the only show; starring Amitabh Bacchan- it was simple and straight. It was excellent of c o u r s e . N o w t h e r e i s a c r o w d o f r e a l i t y s h o w s o n o u r si l v e r s c r e e n . B u t i n a l l t h e s e , e x c e p t m u si c , d a n c e a n d f u n , w h a t w e find more is personal conflicts. Sometimes

there

is

conflict

between

the

judges,

s om e t i m e s

between the trainers, anchors or even between the contestants. F a m e G u r u ku l , N a c h B a l i y e , S a R e G a M a P a , W a a r P a r i w a r e t c all have gone through this sort of incidents. Suddenly the show comes to an indefinite pause when the judges or contestants walk away from the stage, making the audience mute

and

wondering

in

vain.

And

after

great

efforts

and

d i s c u s s i o n b e t w e e n t h e m s e l v e s , e v e r y t h i n g c om e s b a c k t o t h e t r a c k o n c e a g a i n . T h i s h a p p e n s i n a l m o s t a l l t h e r e a l i t y sh o w s o n T V . I t i s h a v i n g a d e b i l i t a t i n g e f f e c t o n t h e c h i l d r e n w h o c om e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n v a r i o u s p r o g r a m m e s , t h e y a r e m ad e r i d i c u l e o f v a r i o u s sn i d e r e m a r k s , a n d j o k e s , a n d t o a p p e a r g l a m o r o u s t h e y are even ready to consign their innocence to the bins. Such has become the desire to be in the drawing room of the citizens of

- 46 -

the country, that even protest morchas have been organized in various cities by the Participants who were kicked out at various stages.

Impacts of Reality TV on Viewers: Viewers of reality television who are addicted to these daily programs often get deeply involved into any situation. Often, certain reality television shows are based on topics that have no thought process or concepts. The audience thus gets hooked on to TV shows, which do not really have any intelligent concept. For

example,

disagreements

reality

TV

between

often

a

group

highlights and

constant

even

fights

telecasts

or

certain

m o m e n t s n o t s u i t a b l e f o r vi e w i n g f o r a f a m i l y a u d i e n c e . H o w e v e r , s o m e r e a l i t y sh o w s m a y e v e n s h o w p o s i t i v e t h i n g s , w h i c h v i e w e r s can learn and apply in their daily life. For example, a person can learn about teamwork or be motivated in life to achieve their goals or even chase a dream

Impacts of Reality TV on Participants: R e a l i t y t e l e v i s i o n c a n b e a d d i c t i v e a n d t h i s i s s om e t h i n g t h e a u d i e n c e a l r e a d y kn o w s . E v e n p a r t i c i p a n t s o r c o n t e s t a n t s w h o f i n a l l y g e t t h e ‘ l u c k y b r e a k ' a l s o f a c e m an y e f f e c t s o f r e a l i t y T V . T h e p o s i t i v e t h i n g a b o u t s u ch s h o w s i s t h a t c o n t e s t a n t s g e t a c h a n c e t o v o i c e t h e i r o p i n i o n s a n d sh o w c a s e t h e i r t a l e n t , w h i c h depends upon the theme of the show. These otherwise ordinary people now live a life that is watched by people around the world. While some enjoy celebrity status, others fade into oblivion. I n s t a n t su c c e s s u p o n w i n n i n g a r e a l i t y t e l e v i s i o n sh o w g i v e s

- 47 -

t a l e n t e d p e o p l e a m u c h - n e e d e d b r e a k . B u t i n s t a n t su c c e s s i s a thing, not everybody can deal with. While some cash on to this s u c c e s s a s t h e y b e l i e v e i n m a k i n g h a y w h i l e t h e su n s h i n e s , others allow success to inflate their egos. Participants that only bask in the glory of their success and allow it to impact them negatively often indulge in outrageous behavior in public and even break laws. Sometimes, certain participants who do not achieve success even tend to go towards depression.

- 48 -

CHAPTER 4 Research Methodology

- 49 -

4.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE Objective

of

conducting

research

on

reality

shows

is

to

exaggerate our knowledge in Entertainment & Media Industry, specifically television sector. In television Reality Shows are at g r o w t h s t a g e a n d a r e f u t u r e o f t e l e v i s i o n t h i s l e a d t o i n sp i r e u s t o do research on such contemporary subject. Here researcher has done exploratory research. O u r o b j e c t i v e i s t o d o p ri m a r y r e s e a r c h t h r o u g h ,

•

Viewers’ attitude & preference towards reality show on television.

•

Factors which are responsible for preference of viewers towards reality shows.

•

Customer profile for the viewership of reality shows.

For that reason experts had done research in two dimension, O b s e r v a t i o n r e s e a r c h a n d P ri m a r y r e s e a r c h o n vi e w e r s .

4.2 RESEARCH DESIGN The design of the research shall be descriptive in nature and also quantitative in nature. Descriptive research designs produce accurate descriptions of variables relevant to the decisions being faced. In this study we have used multiple Cross sectional descriptive design,

- 50 -

w h i c h p r o d u c e s t h e p h e n o m e n o n i n w h i ch t h e d e c i s i o n maker is interested. Quantitative research can be done in order to get the data into figurative terms for analysis and calculation.

4.3 SOURCES OF DATA For

systematic

research,

information

is

required

from

different sources of data.

Generally sources of data are of two types: I. Secondary data II. Primary data Secondary Data: S e c o n d a r y d a t a a r e s t a t i s t i c n o t g a t h e r f o r i m m ed i a t e s t u d y b u t f o r s om e o t h e r p u r p o s e . Here secondary data is about Indian television sector, which includes its history, present scenario and growth of sector. Further about television channels and genre wise viewer ship of channels then about reality show which is having more focus in the project. It contains concept of reality show, origin, reality s h o w s i n I n d i a , t y p e s o f r e a l i t y sh o w s , t r u t h o f r e a l i t y s h o w s , s t r a t e g y b e h i n d s h o w s a n d u p c om i n g r e a l i t y s h o w s o n v a r i o u s television genres.

- 51 -

Primary Data: Primary data may be described as those data that have been observed and recorded by the researcher for the first time to their knowledge. These data organized for the investigation at hand. The type of d a t a , w h i ch r e s e a r c h e r u s e s t o c o n d u c t m a r k e t su r v e y , i s p ri m a r y data.

- 52 -

4.4 SAMPLE DESIGN In

sampling

survey-selected

sample

are

determinate

and

surveyed for collection of relevant data for that it has employed sampling method. Here for research purpose sampling plan is prepared. This plan called for three decisions. I. S a m pl i ng un i t I I . S a m pl e s i z e I I I . S a m pl i ng p r o c e d ur e S a m p l i n g u n i t (w h o i s t o b e s u r v e y e d ? ) T h e s a m p l i n g u n i t s a r e t h e g e n e r a l vi e w e r s . V i e w e r s a r e f r o m chandigarh. S a m p l e si z e ( N o . P e o p l e s h o u l d b e s u r v e y e d ) Large sample gives more reliable sample. So for research 225 viewers from different places have been surveyed. Each and e v e r y vi e w e r i s c o n t a c t e d t o h i s o r h e r p r e f e r e n c e , a t t i t u d e a n d perception towards reality shows. S a m p l i n g p r o c e d u r e (h o w s h o u l d t h e r e s p o n d e n t s c h o s e n ? ) To obtain representative center sample of the population should be

drawn.

Thus

here

non-probability,

method is used.

- 53 -

convenient

sampling

4.5 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY Owing to limited time and resources, the present study w a s l i m i t e d t o 2 2 5 r e s p o n d e n t s f r o m ch a n d i g a r h c i t y . H o w e v e r , attention has been paid to cover all the market segments. A few e r r o r s h a v e c r e p t i n d e s p i t e o f m y e f f o r t s t o a v o i d i t , s u ch a s •

We

have

used

convenience

sampling

so

that

the

analysis may not be true picture of target population. •

The views in this research predominantly reflect the views of viewers belonging to Ahmedabad. So these f i n d i n g s m a y n o t f u l l y c o m p l y w i t h t h e vi e w s o f vi e w e r s of reality shows from other cities.

•

Answers

of

questionnaire

depend

upon

belief

of

r e s p o n d e n t s , w h i ch m a y d i f f e r f r o m t h e r e a l i t y . •

There

are

possibilities

of

exaggerated

information

given by respondents to impress or to cut short the interviewers.

4.6 HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY - 54 -

H 0 (1 ) : T h e r e i s n o s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n A G E a n d Preference to watch genres on television. Ho(2): There is no significant relationship between GENDER and Preference to watch genres on television. Ho(3): There is no significant relationship between GENDER and Perception of viewers on people’s participation on reality show. H o ( 4 ):

There

is

no

significant

relationship

between

OCCUPATION and Perception of viewers on celebrities’ participation on reality show. H o ( 5 ):

There

EDUCATION

is

no

and

significant

Perception

of

relationship

between

vi e w e r s

on

people’s

relationship

between

participation on reality show. Ho(6):

There

is

no

significant

EDUCATION and Perception

of viewers on relevance of

judges on reality show Ho(7): There is no significant relationship between GENDER and reasons for

i n vi t i n g c e l e b r i t y a s g u e s t

H o ( 8 ): T h e r e i s n o s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n A G E a n d reasons for fight between judges during the show Ho(9):

There

is

no

significant

relationship

between

OCCUPATION and reason for fight between judges during the show

- 55 -

H o ( 1 0 ): μ > 3 It shows viewers’ preference towards real, talent hunt, b i a s e d , m o n e y m a k i n g , m od e r n c o n c e p t a n d i n t e r e s t i n g H o ( 1 1 ): A g e g r o u p o f t h e vi e w e r s h a s n o si g n i f i c a n t i m p a c t o n the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows. H o ( 1 2 ): E d u c a t i o n o f t h e vi e w e r s h a s n o si g n i f i c a n t i m p a c t o n the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows. H o ( 1 3 ) : O c c u p a t i o n o f t h e v i e w e r s h a s n o si g n i f i c a n t i m p a c t o n the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows

- 56 -

CHAPTER 5 Research Analysis

- 57 -

5.1 GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS 5 . 1 . 1 Ti m e p r e f e r e n c e t o w a t c h t e l e v i s i o n Table 5.1.1

Frequency Time

Morning

16

6.3

noon

50

19.7

128

50.4

night

21

8.3

Total

215

84.6

39

15.4

evening

Missing Total

Percent

System

254

Chart 5.1.1

- 58 -

I n t e r p r e t a t i o n: Most of the viewers prefer to watch television during evening followed by noon timings.

5.1.2 Age of Respondents Table 5.1.2

Frequency Age

Percent

below18

42

18.7

18-25

67

29.8

26-40

86

38.2

Above 40

30

13.3

225

100.0

Total

Chart 5.1.2 - 59 -

I n t e r p r e t a t i o n: I n o u r s t u d y m a xi m u m p e r s o n s a r e b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 2 5 - 4 0 followed by age of 18-25.

5 . 1 . 3 G e nd e r o f R e s p o n d e n t s Table 5.1.3

Frequency Gender Male Female Total

Percent

140

62.2

85

37.8

225

100.0

- 60 -

Chart 5.1.3 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n: I n t h e su r v e y w e t a k e 1 4 0 p e o p l e a r e m a l e a n d 8 5 a r e f e m a l e .

5 . 1 . 4 O c c up a t i o n o f R e s p o n d e n t s Table 5.1.4

- 61 -

Frequency

Percent

Occupa student

79

35.1

tion

service

70

31.1

house wife

18

8.0

businessman

12

5.3

professional

44

19.6

2

.9

225

100.0

retired Total

Chart 5.1.4 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n: I n t h e s t u d y t h e m aj o r i t y o f p e r s o n s a r e s t u d e n t s a n d s e r v i c e people followed by professional. 5 . 1 . 5 R e a s o n b e h i nd p e o p l e p a r t i c i p a ti o n i n r e a l i t y s h o w Table 5.1.5

- 62 -

Frequency

Percent

People Showing Talent

52

23.1

Particip Exposure ate Money

61

27.1

39

17.3

73

32.4

225

100.0

Getting Good Platform Total

Chart 5.1.5 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n: Getting good platform is one of the main reasons for participating i n r e a l i t y sh o w s . T h i s i s f o l l o w e d b y E x p o s u r e .

5 . 1 . 6. R e a s o n s b e h i nd i n v i ti n g g ue s t s i n r e a l i t y s h o w s Table 5.1.6

- 63 -

Frequency

Percent

Celebrit Fame

49

21.8

ies

Money

30

13.3

Exposure

15

6.7

Publicity

131

58.2

Total

225

Particip ate

Chart 5.1.6 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n: Publicity and Fame are the main reasons for the celebrities to participate in reality shows.

5 . 1 . 7 . J ud g e s a r e r e l e v a n t w i th t h e s h o w s o r n o t Table 5.1.7 - 64 -

Relevancy of Judge Frequency

Percent

Yes

194

86.2

No

31

13.8

225

100.0

Total

Chart 5.1.7 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n: I n M o s t o f t h e sh o w s j u d g e s a r e r e l e v a n t w i t h t h e s h o w s .

5 . 1 . 8 . Fi g h t b e t w e e n j ud g e s Table 5.1.8 - 65 -

Fight between judges Frequency Valid

Percent

Real

15

6.7

Increasing TRP

93

41.3

Publicity

34

15.1

Stunt for getting attention on

83

36.9

225

100.0

the show Total

Chart 5.1.7 Interpretation: F i g h t b e t w e e n j u d g e s i s t o i n c r e a s e T R P a n d i t’ s j u s t a s t u n t 5 . 1 . 9 R e a s o n s f o r i n v i t i ng g ue s ts Table 5.1.9

- 66 -

Celebrity invitation Frequency Valid

Increasing TRP Publicity of Guest's Upcoming

Percent

83

36.9

130

57.8

12

5.3

225

100.0

event To give honor to invited guests Total

Chart 5.1.9 Interpretation Publicity of guests upcoming event is the main reason followed by Increasing TRP. These are the reason for inviting celebrity as guests.

- 67 -

5.2 Data analysis 5.2.1. RANK METHOD The table for calculating the top 4 preferences towards usefulness was according to the ranks given by the respondents. Table 5.2.1.1 Ranks Weight Daily soap News Reality show Sports Cartoon Movies Music •

1 7

2 6

3 5

4 4

5 3

6 2

7 1

203 329 196 343 112

60 246 222 216 84

90 145 170 125 145

96 96 84 60 64

45 108 111 54 108

74 42 54 76 80

92 27 41 45 74

448 259

270 240

160 205

208 136

80 81

12 38

6 27

F o r r a n k 1 , 2 a n d 4 m a xi m u m r e s p o n s e w a s 6 4 , 4 5 a n d 5 2 f o r ‘news’

•

F o r r a n k 3 m a x i m u m r e s p o n s e s w a s 2 7 f o r ‘ m u si c ’

•

For rank 5 maximum responses were 29 for ‘Reality Shows’.

R a n k s a c c o r d i n g t o W A M ( w e i g h t e d a v g . m e th o d ) W e h a v e t a k e n r a n k 1 a s t h e h i g h e s t p ri o r i t y a n d 7 t h e l o w e s t priority. Hence rank 1 gets weight 7, rank 2 gets 6 and so on. Table 5.2.1.2. Ranks Weight Daily soap News Reality show Sports Cartoon Movies Music

1 7

2 6

3 5

4 4

5 3

6 2

7 1

Total

WAM

Rank

203 329 196 343 112

60 246 222 216 84

90 145 170 125 145

96 96 84 60 64

45 108 111 54 108

74 42 54 76 80

92 27 41 45 74

660 993 878 919 667

448 259

270 240

160 205

208 136

80 81

12 38

6 27

1184 985

2.93 4.41 3.9 4.08 2.96 5.26 4.37

7 2 5 4 6 1 3

- 68 -

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Show Movies News Music Sports Reality shows Cartoons Daily Soaps

- 69 -

5.2.2 Chi-square tests Hypothesis 1 H0:

There

is

no

significant

relationship

between

AGE

and

Preference to watch genres on television H1: There is significant relationship between AGE and Preference to watch genres on television

Age * Timeprefernce Cross tabulation Time preference Morning Age

below18

Count % within Age

18-25

26-40

Above 40

Total

3

40

5.0%

27.5%

60.0%

7.5%

100.0%

7

11

39

8

65

10.8%

16.9%

60.0%

12.3%

100.0%

6

21

48

5

80

7.5%

26.3%

60.0%

6.3%

100.0%

1

7

17

5

30

3.3%

23.3%

56.7%

16.7%

100.0%

16

50

128

21

215

7.4%

23.3%

59.5%

9.8%

100.0%

Count % within Age

Total

24

Count % within Age

night

11

Count % within Age

evening

2

Count % within Age

noon

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. Value

df

(2-sided)

6.871a

9

.651

6.940

9

.643

Linear-by-Linear Association

.180

1

.672

N of Valid Cases

215

Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio

a. 5 cells (31.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.23.

- 70 -

Decision Rule: I n a ch i - sq u a r e t e s t f o r a 9 5 % c o n f i d e n c e i n t e r v a l i f t h e significance level is greater than or equal to 0.05 it signifies that there is no association between two variables in the cross tabulation and if the significance level is less than 0.05 then it signifies that there is a significant relationship between the selected variables. RESULT of Chi- square test: F r o m t h e o u t p u t t a b l e s t h e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t r e a d a si g n i f i c a n c e level of 0.651 at 95% confidence level. As it is greater than 0.05, we

should

accept

the

null

hypothesis

that

is

there

is

no

significant relationship between age and preference to watch television.

- 71 -

Hypothesis 2 Ho: There is no significant relationship between GENDER and Preference to watch genres on television H1:

There

is

significant

relationship

between

GENDER

and

Preference to watch genres on television

Gender * Time preference Cross tabulation Time preference Morning Gender

Male

Count % within Gender

Female

Count % within Gender

Total

Count % within Gender

noon

evening

night

9

35

77

11

132

6.8%

26.5%

58.3%

8.3%

100.0%

7

15

51

10

83

8.4%

18.1%

61.4%

12.0%

100.0%

16

50

128

21

215

7.4%

23.3%

59.5%

9.8%

100.0%

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value

df

sided)

2.544a

3

.467

2.579

3

.461

Linear-by-Linear Association

.738

1

.390

N of Valid Cases

215

Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio

Total

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6.18.

- 72 -

Decision Rule: I n a ch i - sq u a r e t e s t f o r a 9 5 % c o n f i d e n c e i n t e r v a l i f t h e significance level is greater than or equal to 0.05 it signifies that there is no association between two variables in the cross tabulation and if the significance level is less than 0.05 then it signifies that there is a significant relationship between the selected variables. RESULT of Chi- square test: F r o m t h e o u t p u t t a b l e s t h e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t r e a d a si g n i f i c a n c e level of 0.467 at 95% confidence level. As it is greater than 0.05, we should accept the null hypothesis that is there is no significant relationship between gender and preference to watch television.

- 73 -

Hypothesis 3 Ho: There is no significant relationship between GENDER and Perception of

vi e w e r s o n p e o p l e ’ s p a r t i c i p a t i o n o n r e a l i t y

show H1: There is significant relationship between GENDER and P e r c e p t i o n o f v i e w e r s o n p e o p l e ’ s p a r t i c i p a t i o n o n r e a l i t y sh o w ]

Gender * People Participate Cross tabulation People Participate Getting Good Showing Talent Gender

Male

Count % within Gender

Female

Count % within Gender

Total

Count % within Gender

Exposure

Money

Platform

Total

34

39

26

41

140

24.3%

27.9%

18.6%

29.3%

100.0%

18

22

13

32

85

21.2%

25.9%

15.3%

37.6%

100.0%

52

61

39

73

225

23.1%

27.1%

17.3%

32.4%

100.0%

- 74 -

Chi-Square Tests Value

df

Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

1.765a

3

.623

Likelihood Ratio

1.753

3

.625

Linear-by-Linear Association

1.067

1

.302

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

225

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 14.73.

RESULT of Chi- square test: From

the

output

tables

the

chi-

square

test

read

a

significance level of 0.623 at 95% confidence level. As it is g r e a t e r t h a n 0 . 0 5 , w e s h o u l d a c c e p t t h e n u l l h yp o t h e s i s t h a t is there is no significant relationship between gender and Perception of viewers on people’s participation on reality show.

- 75 -

Hypothesis 4 Ho:

There

is

no

significant

relationship

between

OCCUPATION and Perception of viewers on celebrities’ participation on reality show. H1: There is significant relationship between OCCUPATION and Perception of viewers on celebrities’ participation on reality show.

- 76 -

Occupation * Celebrities Participate Cross tabulation Celebrities Participate Fame Occupation

student

Count % within Occupation

service

house wife

businessman

professional

47

79

24.1%

12.7%

3.8%

59.5%

100.0%

14

16

8

32

70

20.0%

22.9%

11.4%

45.7%

100.0%

4

0

2

12

18

22.2%

.0%

11.1%

66.7%

100.0%

4

2

0

6

12

33.3%

16.7%

.0%

50.0%

100.0%

8

2

2

32

44

18.2%

4.5%

4.5%

72.7%

100.0%

0

0

0

2

2

.0%

.0%

.0%

100.0%

100.0%

49

30

15

131

225

21.8%

13.3%

6.7%

58.2%

100.0%

Count % within Occupation

retired

Count % within Occupation

Total

Count % within Occupation

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

21.400a

15

.125

24.998

15

.050

2.484

1

.115

225

a. 12 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .13.

- 77 -

Total

3

Count % within Occupation

Publicity

10

Count % within Occupation

Exposure

19

Count % within Occupation

Money

RESULT of Chi- square test: From

the

output

tables

the

chi-

square

test

read

a

significance level of 0.125 at 95% confidence level. As it is g r e a t e r t h a n 0 . 0 5 , w e s h o u l d a c c e p t t h e n u l l h yp o t h e s i s t h a t is there is no significant relationship between occupation and Perception of viewers on celebrities’ participation on reality show.

Hypothesis 5 Ho: There is no significant relationship between EDUCATION and Perception of viewers on people’s participation on reality show

- 78 -

H1: There is significant relationship between EDUCATION and Perception of viewers on people’s participation on reality show Education * People Participate Cross tabulation People Participate Getting Good Showing Talent Education

UG

Count % within Education

Grad

PG

Professional

Total

12

36

33.3%

16.7%

16.7%

33.3%

100.0%

26

27

11

24

88

29.5%

30.7%

12.5%

27.3%

100.0%

10

24

14

35

83

12.0%

28.9%

16.9%

42.2%

100.0%

4

4

8

2

18

22.2%

22.2%

44.4%

11.1%

100.0%

52

61

39

73

225

23.1%

27.1%

17.3%

32.4%

100.0%

Count % within Education

Total

6

Count % within Education

Platform

6

Count % within Education

Money

12

Count % within Education

Exposure

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association

df

(2-sided)

24.243a

9

.004

23.584

9

.005

2.414

1

.120

N of Valid Cases

225

a. 3 cells (18.8%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3.12.

RESULT of Chi- square test: From

the

output

tables

the

chi-

square

test

read

a

significance level of 0.004 at 95% confidence level. As it is greater than 0.05, we should reject the null hypothesis that - 79 -

is there is significant relationship between education and Perception of viewers on people’s participation on reality show.

Hypothesis 6

- 80 -

Ho: There is no significant relationship between EDUCATION and Perception of viewers on relevance of judges on reality show H1: There is significant relationship between EDUCATION and Perception of viewers on relevance of judges on reality show

Education * Relevancy of Judge Cross tabulation Relevancy of Judge Yes Education

UG

Count % within Education

Grad

PG

Professional

36

83.3%

16.7%

100.0%

80

8

88

90.9%

9.1%

100.0%

70

13

83

84.3%

15.7%

100.0%

14

4

18

77.8%

22.2%

100.0%

194

31

225

86.2%

13.8%

100.0%

Count % within Education

Total

6

Count % within Education

Count % within Education

Total

30

Count % within Education

No

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. Value

df

(2-sided)

3.209a

3

.361

3.234

3

.357

Linear-by-Linear Association

.664

1

.415

N of Valid Cases

225

Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio

a. 2 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.48.

RESULT of Chi- square test:

- 81 -

From

the

output

tables

the

chi-

square

test

read

a

significance level of 0.361 at 95% confidence level. As it is g r e a t e r t h a n 0 . 0 5 , w e s h o u l d a c c e p t t h e n u l l h yp o t h e s i s t h a t is there is no significant relationship between education and Perception of viewers on relevance of judges on reality show.

Hypothesis 7 Ho: There is no significant relationship between GENDER and reasons for inviting celebrity as guest H1: There is significant relationship between GENDER and r e a s o n s f o r i n vi t i n g c e l e b r i t y a s g u e s t

- 82 -

Gender * Celebrity invitation Cross tabulation Celebrity invitation Publicity of Increasing TRP Gender

Male

Count % within Gender

Female

Total

Upcoming event

invited guests

Total

76

10

140

38.6%

54.3%

7.1%

100.0%

29

54

2

85

34.1%

63.5%

2.4%

100.0%

83

130

12

225

36.9%

57.8%

5.3%

100.0%

Count % within Gender

To give honor to

54

Count % within Gender

Guest's

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. Value

df

(2-sided)

3.342a

2

.188

3.630

2

.163

Linear-by-Linear Association

.002

1

.966

N of Valid Cases

225

Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio

a. 1 cells (16.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4.53.

RESULT of Chi- square test: From

the

output

tables

the

chi-

square

test

read

a

significance level of 0.188 at 95% confidence level. As it is g r e a t e r t h a n 0 . 0 5 , w e s h o u l d a c c e p t t h e n u l l h yp o t h e s i s s o t h e r e i s n o si g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n g e n d e r a n d Perception of viewers on reasons for inviting celebrities as guest.

- 83 -

Hypothesis 8 Ho: There is no significant relationship between AGE and reasons for fight between judges during the show H1:

There

is

significant

relationship

between

reasons for fight between judges during the show

- 84 -

AGE

and

Age * Fight between judge Cross tabulation Count Fight between judge Stunt for getting attention on the Real Age

Increasing TRP

Publicity

show

Total

below18

2

12

10

18

42

18-25

1

39

6

21

67

26-40

10

28

12

36

86

2

14

6

8

30

15

93

34

83

225

Above 40 Total

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association

df

(2-sided)

20.898a

9

.013

21.396

9

.011

1.178

1

.278

N of Valid Cases

225

a. 4 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.00.

RESULT of Chi- square test: From

the

output

tables

the

chi-

square

test

read

a

significance level of 0.013 at 95% confidence level. As it is l e s s t h a n 0 . 0 5 , w e s h o u l d r e j e c t t h e n u l l h yp o t h e s i s t h a t i s there is significant relationship between age and Perception

- 85 -

o f vi e w e r s o n r e a s o n f o r f i g h t b e t w e e n j u d g e s d u r i n g t h e show.

Hypothesis 9 Ho:

There

is

no

significant

relationship

between

OCCUPATION and reason for fight between judges during the show

- 86 -

H1: There is significant relationship between OCCUPATION and reason for fight between judges during the show Occupation * Fight between judge Cross tabulation Count Fight between judge Stunt for getting attention on the Real Occupation

Increasing TRP

Publicity

show

Total

Student

3

37

14

25

79

Service

6

24

10

30

70

house wife

2

8

4

4

18

businessman

2

4

2

4

12

Professional

2

20

2

20

44

Retired

0

0

2

0

2

15

93

34

83

225

Total

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. Value

df

(2-sided)

24.541a

15

.056

21.720

15

.115

Linear-by-Linear Association

.129

1

.720

N of Valid Cases

225

Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio

a. 12 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .13.

RESULT of Chi- square test: From

the

output

tables

the

chi-

square

test

read

a

significance level of 0.056 at 95% confidence level. As it is - 87 -

g r e a t e r t h a n 0 . 0 5 , w e s h o u l d a c c e p t t h e n u l l h yp o t h e s i s t h a t is there no is significant relationship between OCCUPATION and reason for fight between judges during the show

5.2.3 T – tests F o r d a t a a n a l y s i s o f S ym a n t e c s c a l e r e s e a r c h e r h a s u s e d t test setting following hypothesis

- 88 -

Hypothesis testing Null hypothesis: μ > 3 I t s h o w s vi e w e r s ’ p r e f e r e n c e t o w a r d s r e a l , t a l e n t h u n t , b i a s e d , m o n e y m a ki n g , m o d e r n c o n c e p t a n d i n t e r e s t i n g . Alternative hypothesis: μ ≤ 3 I t s h o w s vi e w e r ’ s p r e f e r e n c e t o w a r d s u n r e a l , p u b l i c i t y, u n b i a s e d , CSR activity, traditional and uninteresting. Table 5.2.3.1 One-Sample Statistics N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Real or unreal

225

2.96

1.293

.086

Talent hunt or publicity

225

2.84

1.283

.086

Biased or unbiased

225

2.74

1.121

.075

Money making or CSR

225

1.86

1.220

.081

Modern or Traditional

225

2.28

1.249

.083

Interesting or Uninteresting

225

2.52

1.177

.078

Table 5.2.3.2

- 89 -

One-Sample Test Test Value = 3 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference t Real or unreal

df

Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Difference

Lower

Upper

-.464

224

.643

-.040

-.21

.13

Talent hunt or publicity

-1.922

224

.056

-.164

-.33

.00

Biased or unbiased

-3.509

224

.001

-.262

-.41

-.11

Money making or CSR

-14.043

224

.000

-1.142

-1.30

-.98

Modern or Traditional

-8.648

224

.000

-.720

-.88

-.56

Interesting or Uninteresting

-6.063

224

.000

-.476

-.63

-.32

Decision rule: If the significance value is less than 0.05 then the null hypothesis is rejected and if the significance value is more than 0.05 then the null hypothesis is accepted. Here except first factor that is real and unreal; all show significance value less than 0.05. so it can be concluded that v i e w e r s ’ p e r c e i v e r e a l i t y s h o w s a s u n r e a l , t a l e n t h u n t, b i a s e d , M o n e y m a ki n g , M o d e r n c o n c e p t a n d i n t e r e s t i n g .

5.2.4. Factor analysis - 90 -

Factor analysis, which identifies the latent or underlying factors from an array of seemingly important variables, was done. In a more general way, factor analysis is a set of techniques, which, by analyzing the correlation between variables, reduces t h e i r n u m b e r s i n t o f e w e r f a c t o r s , w h i ch e x p l a i n m u c h o f t h e original data, more economically. Nargundkar 2005. M e a s u r e o f s a m p l e a d e q u a c y su c h a s B a r t l e t t ' s T e s t o f sphericity (Approx. Chi-Square is 159.530, degree of freedom is 66, significance is 0.000) and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value ( 0 . 5 5 0 ) s h o w e d t h a t d a t a w e r e f i t f o r f a c t o r a n a l y s i s . P ri n c i p a l component analysis was used for extracting factors and four factors variance

were

retained

explained.

and

depending

Eigenvalue

upon

represent

Eigenvalues

the

total

and

variance

e x p l a i n e d b y e a c h f a c t o r a s sh o w n i n t h e f i g u r e .

Table 5.2.4.1 KMO and Bartlett’s Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square

.626 321.913

Df

66

Sig.

.000

T h e s t a n d a r d p r a c t i c e n o rm a l l y u s e d i s t h a t a l l t h e f a c t o r s w i t h a n Eigenvalue of 1 or more should be extracted. The Scree plot clearly shows that there are 4 factors having Eigenvalue more t h a n 1 ( i n o t h e r w o r d s, a f a c t o r m u s t e x p l a i n a t l e a s t a s m u ch o f the variance if not more, than a single original variable.)

- 91 -

Fig. 1 Thus four factors were extracted. The solution of factor analysis gave four factors, which explained 55% of the total variance. The results were obtained through orthogonal rotations with Varimax method. The name of the factors, variable labels and factor loadings are summarized in the below given table.

- 92 -

Table 5.2.4.2

Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues

Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings

Cumulative Component

Total

% of Variance

%

Total

% of Variance

Cumulative %

1

2.379

19.824

19.824

2.029

16.907

16.907

2

1.721

14.345

34.169

1.679

13.994

30.901

3

1.259

10.491

44.660

1.417

11.811

42.712

4

1.100

9.170

53.830

1.334

11.118

53.830

5

.981

8.174

62.004

6

.849

7.075

69.079

7

.818

6.819

75.898

8

.704

5.869

81.767

9

.664

5.535

87.303

10

.606

5.051

92.354

11

.481

4.005

96.358

12

.437

3.642

100.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

E x t r a c t i o n M e t h o d : P r i n ci p a l C om p o n e n t A n a l y s i s The table shown below depicts that: Factor 1 is a linear combination of variables 5, 8 and 9. Factor 2 is a linear combination of variables 1, 2 and 3. Factor 3 is a linear combination of variables 4, 6 and 12. Factor 4 is a linear combination of variables 10 and 11. All the 4 factors

collectively explained

variance

Table 5.2.4.3 - 93 -

54.00% of the total

Rotated Component Matrix Component 1

2

3

4

Voting System is the way of involving audience participants.

.252

-.635

.274

.147

Voting System is the way of Earning.

.141

.765

.141

.067

Voting System is not Real.

-.425

.630

.138

-.103

Voting System is for gaining more Popularity.

-.279

-.098

.744

.093

Voting System is a proper way to choose winner.

.673

-.083

-.062

.019

Judges are unbiased evaluation of participants.

on

.305

.144

.522

-.207

more

.456

-.255

.412

.086

Winner of the show actually deserves to win.

.700

-.061

.070

.045

Audience is expert enough to judge the participants.

.664

.004

.000

-.078

Popularity of reality Show is decreasing.

-.019

.124

-.074

-.762

Reality Shows are more popular than other soaps.

-.009

.034

-.146

.797

Reality shows should come daily not on week ends.

-.032

-.414

-.521

.115

Voting makes interesting.

show

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

After the number of extracted factors was decided, the next step is to interpret and name the factors. This is done by the process of identifying the factors associated with a particular original variable using a factor matrix. The factor matrix gives the loading of each variable on each of the extracted factors. This is similar

- 94 -

t o t h e c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x, w i t h l o a d i n g s h a v i n g v a l u e s b e t w e e n 0 a n d 1 . V a l u e s c l o s e t o 1 r e p r e s e n t h i g h l o a d i n g s a n d t h o s e cl o s e to 0, low loadings. The objective is to find the variables with high loading on one factor, but low loading on other factors. NAMING OF FACTORS All the factors have been given appropriate names according to the variables that have been loaded on each factor. The five factors are discussed in the table given below:

Table 5.2.4.4 Naming Of Factors Factor No. F1

F2

F3

F4

Name of Factors Selection of winner

Genuine Voting System

Judges Decision And voting system of the shows Popularity

Iter No.

Variables

Factor Loadings

5 Voting is the proper way to choose winner

0.673

8 Winner of the show actually deserves to win

0.7

9 Audience is expert enough to judge the participants 1 Voting System is the way of involving audience participants 2 Voting system is the way of earning 3 Voting system is not real

0.664 0.635 0.765 0.63

4 Voting System is for gaining more Popularity

0.744

6 Judges are unbiased on evaluation of participants

0.522

12 Reality shows should come daily not on weekends 10 Popularity of reality shows is decreasing 11 Reality shows are more popular than other soaps

- 95 -

0.521 0.762 0.797

Factor – 1: Selection of Winner The rotated matrix reveals that respondents perceive this factor to be the most important factor with the highest explained variance of 16.907%. Three of 12 features load on significantly to this factor. This factor is named as selection of w i n n e r a s i t i n c l u d e s v o t i n g i s t h e p r o p e r w a y t o ch o o s e w i n n e r , winner of the show actually deserves to win, and audience is expert to judge the participant. Thus this factor is the most crucial factor that let us know the perception of viewers about selection procedure for choosing the winner.

Factor – 2: Genuine Voting System It has been revealed to be the second most important factor with explained variance of 13.994%. There were 3 types of attribute loaded under this factor. Voting system is the way of involving audience, Voting system is the way of earning, and Voting system is not real are highly loaded under this factor and t h u s i t i s n am e d a s G e n u i n e v o t i n g s y s t e m .

Factor – 3: Judges Decision and Voting system This factor accounts for 11.811% of the variance. Three types of factors were loaded on this factor. Whether judges a r e b i a s e d o r n o t r e g a r d i n g t h e i r c om m e n t s i s d e b a t a b l e i s s u e . Voting system is for gaining more popularity and reality shows s h o u l d c o m e d a i l y o r w e e k e n d a r e t h e m ai n f e a t u r e s l o a d e d i n this factor.

Factor – 4: Popularity This factor accounts for 11.118% of the variance. Popularity of reality shows is decreasing and reality shows are - 96 -

more popular than other soaps under this factor. So it’s about popularity of the shows and perception of the viewers related with other soaps.

ANOVA TEST ANOVA between factors v/s age Null hypothesis: A g e g r o u p o f t h e v i e w e r s h a s n o si g n i f i c a n t i m p a c t on the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows. Alternate hypothesis: A g e g r o u p o f t h e v i e w e r s h a s s i g n i f i c a n t impact on the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows.

Table 5.2.4.5

- 97 -

ANOVA

Sum of Squares

F2

F3

F1

F4

Between Groups

df

Mean Square

3.271

3

1.090

Within Groups

225.289

221

1.019

Total

228.560

224

8.800

3

2.933

Within Groups

168.862

221

.764

Total

177.662

224

21.074

3

7.025

Within Groups

256.321

221

1.160

Total

277.396

224

19.531

3

6.510

Within Groups

180.398

221

.816

Total

199.929

224

Between Groups

Between Groups

Between Groups

F

Sig.

1.070

.363

3.839

.010

6.057

.001

7.976

.000

Table 5.2.4.6

Post hoc analysis: age and judges decision Mean Std. Sig. difference error (I–J) Dependent (I)

(J)

- 98 -

95% Confidence Interval Lower Upper bound bound

Variable

AG AGE E Above 18-25 -0.581 40 years 26-40 -0.575 years

0.192

0.003 -0.96

-0.2

0.185

0.002 -0.94

-0.21

Table 5.2.4.7 Post hoc analysis: age and selection of winner Mean Std. Sig. difference error (I–J) Dependent (I) Variable

(J)

95% Confidence Interval Lower Upper bound bound

AG AGE E Above Below -0.762 40 18 18-25 -0.92 years

0.257

0.003 -1.27

-0.25

0.237

0

-0.45

-1.39

Table 5.2.4.8 Post hoc analysis: age and popularity of the shows Mean Std. Sig. 95% difference error Confidence (I–J) Interval Dependent (I) (J) Lower Upper bound bound

- 99 -

Variable

AG AGE E Below 26-40 -0.791 18

0.17

0

-1.13

-0.46

Decision rule D e c i s i o n f o r t e s t i n g n u l l h y p o t h e s i s : i f t h e si g n i f i c a n c e v a l u e i s less than 0.05 then the null hypothesis is rejected and if the s i g n i f i c a n c e v a l u e i s m o r e t h a n 0 . 0 5 t h e n n u l l h yp o t h e s i s i s accepted. A g e o f t h e v i e w e r s h a s n o si g n i f i c a n t i m p a c t o n t h e i m p o r t a n c e g i v e n t o t h e f a c t o r s f o r r e a l i t y sh o w s , h a s b e e n a c c e p t e d i n c a s e o f g e n u i n e v o t i n g s y s t e m a s sh o w n i n t a b l e a b o v e . F o r f u r t h e r analysis, post-hoc analysis is used which shows that viewers from age group above 40 years give greater importance to judges decision and selection of winner. Also the viewers from age group below 18 years give more important to the popularity of the shows.

ANOVA between factors v/s education Null hypothesis: E d u c a t i o n o f t h e v i e w e r s h a s n o s i g n i f i c a n t i m p a c t on the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows. Alternate hypothesis: E d u c a t i o n

of

the

viewers

has

significant

impact on the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows. - 100 -

Table 5.2.4.9 ANOVA

Sum of Squares

F2

F3

F1

F4

Between Groups

df

Mean Square

.611

3

.204

Within Groups

227.949

221

1.031

Total

228.560

224

9.280

3

3.093

Within Groups

168.382

221

.762

Total

177.662

224

5.212

3

1.737

Within Groups

272.184

221

1.232

Total

277.396

224

10.743

3

3.581

Within Groups

189.186

221

.856

Total

199.929

224

Between Groups

Between Groups

Between Groups

F

Sig.

.198

.898

4.060

.008

1.411

.241

4.183

.007

Table 5.2.4.10 Post hoc analysis: Education and Judges Decision Mean Std. Sig. difference error

- 101 -

95% Confidence

Dependent (I) Variable

(J)

Education Education Professional

interval Lower Upper bound bound

PG

(I–J) -0.467

0.227

0.041 -0.91

-0.02

Table 5.2.4.11 Post hoc analysis: Education and Popularity Mean Std. Sig. difference error (I–J) Dependent (I) Variable

(J)

95% Confidence interval Lower Upper bound bound

Education Education UG

Professional

-0.5

0.267

0.063 -1.03

H e r e si g n i f i c a n c e v a l u e o f f a c t o r s G e n u i n e v o t i n g s y s t e m a n d Selection of winner are greater than 0.05. Hence we do not reject null hypothesis. Therefore it can be said that the education qualification has no significant impact on the importance given to the factors for reality show. Post-hoc analysis shows that viewers from education group of professional give greater importance to judges’ decision and s e l e c t i o n o f w i n n e r . A l s o t h e vi e w e r s f r o m e d u c a t i o n g r o u p o f under graduate give more important to the popularity of the shows.

- 102 -

0.03

ANOVA between factors v/s occupation Null hypothesis: O c c u p a t i o n o f t h e v i e w e r s h a s n o s i g n i f i c a n t impact on the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows. Alternate hypothesis: O c c u p a t i o n o f t h e v i e w e r s h a s s i g n i f i c a n t impact on the importance given to the factors that are considered to be more influencing for reality shows.

Table 5.2.4.8 ANOVA

Sum of Squares

F2

F3

F1

F4

Between Groups

df

Mean Square

21.339

5

4.268

Within Groups

207.221

219

.946

Total

228.560

224

17.788

5

3.558

Within Groups

159.874

219

.730

Total

177.662

224

16.540

5

3.308

Within Groups

260.855

219

1.191

Total

277.396

224

8.563

5

1.713

Within Groups

191.365

219

.874

Total

199.929

224

Between Groups

Between Groups

Between Groups

- 103 -

F

Sig.

4.510

.001

4.873

.000

2.777

.019

1.960

.086

- 104 -

Table 5.2.4.9 Post hoc analysis: Occupation and Genuine Voting system Mean Std. Sig. difference error (I–J)

95% Confidence interval Lower Upper bound bound

Dependent (I)

(J)

Variable

Education

Education

student service house wife

retired retired retired service retired service

-1.051 -.771 -1.111 -.562 -1.333 -.819*

.696 .698 .725 .304 .743 .187

.133 .270 .127 .066 .074 .000

-2.42 -2.15 -2.54 -1.16 -2.80 -1.19

.32 .60 .32 .04 .13 -.45

house wife

-.480

.272

.079

-1.02

.06

-1.591*

.703

.025

-2.98

-.20

businessman

professional

retired

Table 5.2.4.9 Post hoc analysis: Occupation and Judges' Decision Mean Std. Sig. difference error (I–J) Dependent (I) Variable

(J)

95% Confidence interval Lower Upper bound bound

Education Education house wife

professional

retired

student service Business man retired Business man retired student service Business man professional

-.814* -.819* -1.000*

.223 .226 .318

.000 .000 .002

-1.25 -1.26 -1.63

-.37 -.37 -.37

-.333 -.667*

.637 .278

.601 .017

-1.59 -1.22

.92 -.12

.618 1.000

-1.22

1.22

.612 .613 .653

.433 .429 .308

-1.69 -1.69 -1.95

.72 .72 .62

.618 1.000

-1.22

1.22

.000 -.481 -.486 -.667 - 105 .000

Table 5.2.4.10 Post hoc analysis: Occupation and Selection of winner Mean Std. Sig. 95% difference error Confidence (I–J) interval Dependen (I) (J) Lower Upper t bound bound Variable Education Education -.592* -.406 -.808* .556 -.462 -.864*

.210 .285 .305 .813 .338 .355

.005 .155 .009 .495 .173 .016

-1.01 -.97 -1.41 -1.05 -1.13 -1.56

-.18 .16 -.21 2.16 .20 -.16

retired student service house wife

.500 -.962 -.771 -.556

.834 .781 .783 .813

.549 .220 .325 .495

-1.14 -2.50 -2.31 -2.16

2.14 .58 .77 1.05

businessman

-.500

.834

.549

-2.14

1.14

professional

-1.364

.789

.085

-2.92

.19

service house wife

professional student professional retired businessman student professional retired

Here significance value of only one factor is greater than 0.05. Hence we do not reject null hypothesis. Therefore it can be said that the occupation has no significant impact on the Popularity of the shows. So for finding the significant impact on the other three factors we done the Post-Hoc analysis

- 106 -

- 107 -

CHAPTER 6 Findings and Suggestions

6.1 Awareness of reality shows Chart 6.1

- 108 -

From the chart we find that the people are mostly aware about the Talent shows like Dance India Dance and Music ka M a h a Mu q a b l a f o l l o w e d b y t h e s h o w o f R a h u l k a S w a y a m v a r a n d Roadies.

- 109 -

6.2 Frequently watch of reality shows Chart 6.2

Most of the people frequently watch Dance India Dance t a l e n t sh o w . A f t e r t h a t t h e y w a t c h A m u l M u s i c k a m u q q a b a l a a n d R o a d i e s . T h e v i e w e r s w h o a r e a w a r e a b o u t t h e sh o w b u t t h e y don’t watch the shows because of most of viewers are not interested in those shows. And another reason is given by them is the timing of the shows. Because most of the shows broadcast on the weekend at the evening in the same time. Most of the viewers like to watch the talent shows because o f t h e y l i k e s i n g i n g o r d a n c i n g s o t h e s h o w s l i k e A m u l Mu s i c k a M a h a Mu q q a b a l a a n d D n a c e I n d i a D a n c e g e t t h e h i g h e s t r a n k . I n another study we find that the shows like Emotional Atyaachar , Roadies

and Splits Villa are

very

famous

in the teenagers

particularly the age group of 16 to 22 years. We also find that m o s t o f t h e V i e w e r s w h o w a t c h t h e sh o w o f R a h u l K a S w a y a m v a r are strongly disagree with the contituty of the show in future.

- 110 -

The Viewers who are disagree with the relevancy of the j u d g e t o t h e sh o w s m a i n l y g i v e 2 r e a s o n s . F i r s t i s N a v j o t s i n g h Sidhu who become the judge of Laughter Challenge and Second is Sonali Bendre who become the judge of Indian Idol.

6.3 Major Findings by the Researcher •

R e s e a r c h e r h a s m ad e t h e su r v e y a n d c o m e t o k n o w t h a t people are interested to watch the reality shows rather than d a i l y s o a p s b u t m o v i e s c om e s f i r s t i n t h e p r e f e r e n c e .

•

Though reality shows are full of controversies still major of population prefer to watch the reality shows.

•

Researcher has found that people are participating in the reality shows for various reasons but the main reason behind participating is they are getting good platform and another reason is exposure.

•

Also people believe that the celebrities participate in the reality shows because of publicity that they are getting from the reality shows.

•

Viewers

believe

that

fight

between

judges

is

only

for

i n c r e a s i n g T R P f o l l o w e d b y t h e r e a s o n o f P u b l i ci t y S t u n t . •

R e s e a r c h e r a l s o f o u n d t h a t t h e m a i n r e a s o n f o r i n vi t i n g c e l e b r i t i e s i n t h e sh o w i s f o r p u b l i ci t y o f g u e s t ’ s u p c om i n g event.

•

Public voting system is the way of earning for show maker but

viewers

now

aware

about

this

fact.

They

are

not

agreeing on having public voting to choose winner of the show. •

I n c a s e o f v i e w s r e g a r d i n g w i n n e r o f t h e s h o w s , vi e w e r s ’ believe that winners actually deserve to win.

- 111 -

•

A t t h e e n d r e s e a r c h e r f o u n d t h a t vi e w e r s k n o w t h a t m o s t o f t h e r e a l i t y s h o w s a r e u n r e a l a n d w a y o f m on e y m a k i n g f o r m a r k e t e r s b u t s t i l l t h e y p r e f e r r e a l i t y sh o w s b e c a u s e t h e y are interesting compare to daily soaps.

•

Most of the viewers at one end believe that popularity of reality shows are decreasing but on other end reality shows are more popular then daily soaps. This seems to be r e s p o n s e o f c o n f u s e d vi e w e r s . T h a t c a n m a k e a n y sh o w successful.

Suggestion R e a l i t y sh o w s m u s t b e b a s e d o n t h e c u l t u r a l e t h i c s a n d s o c i e t y we live in. Shows influenced by western culture vanish our culture to some extent however some exposure to western culture is considerable. There must be some check on the content as children get exposure to issues before age. F r e q u e n c y o f r e a l i t y sh o w s p r o m o t i n g s o c i a l c a u s e s m u s t r i s e s a s they make the public more and more aware as well as motivate them to take become Samaritan. F r e q u e n c y o f r e a l i t y sh o w s p r o m o t i n g f o l l o w i n g m u s t b e increased •

Social Cause

•

Laughter Shows (Stress Busters)

•

Talent Shows (Good Platform to promote right Talent)

- 112 -

Strict rules must be implemented to check language used in reality shows. Public Voting must be the only way to decide the winner Result Criterion must be more transparent and must be based on the real test of talent.

S o m e r e a l i t y sh o w s p r o m o t e c a n d i d a t e s b a s e d o n t h e i r a t t i t u d e rather talent must be checked •

Splitsville

•

Roadies

•

Rahul Dulahaniya le jayega

- 113 -

CHAPTER 7 Conclusion

From

a b o v e s t u d y,

Researcher

concluded that though

r e a l i t y s h o w s a r e am o n g t h e m o s t p r e f e r r e d w a y o f e n t e r t a i n m e n t - 114 -

through television, their popularity are decreasing & viewers now understand the motives of show maker. But still viewers would like to see it. Still future of the reality shows is brighter then other shows as viewers believe that they are interesting.

Bibliography Websites:

- 115 -

PWC official website for entertainment and media industry www.pwc.com/.../ficci-pwc-indian-entertainment-and-media-industry.pdf IDCINDIA website for the current growth of broadcasting medium www.idcindia.com

Google Website for search http://www.google.co.in/ Scribd website for getting more information about Reality shows http://www.scribd.com/ Books: Market Research by Malhotra and Das- 5th edition Statistics for management by Levin and Rubin- 7th edition

News papers: Times of India-The Crest Edition

- 116 -