| Revision as of 20:03, 1 December 2005 editWarriorScribe (talk | contribs)1,372 edits Contrived excuse to include episode unnecessarily holds up a specific person to scrutiny and potential ridicule. If the party wants his POV presented here, it should fall to him to present it here.← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:05, 1 December 2005 edit undoWarriorScribe (talk | contribs)1,372 edits Restored vandalized section by Jason Gastrich, i.e., "'Reality TV' vs Reality," which was removed without explanation and for no good reason.Next edit → | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| In November of 2005, a participant on the show sued ABC network for trading his wife for a gay man. He accused ABC of being dishonest, not allowing him contact with his own wife, and making him miss college classes. He is suing for over $10,000,000. | In November of 2005, a participant on the show sued ABC network for trading his wife for a gay man. He accused ABC of being dishonest, not allowing him contact with his own wife, and making him miss college classes. He is suing for over $10,000,000. | ||
| =="Reality TV" vs Reality== | |||
| Some critics of the show and of the genre, in general, feel that the mechanisms of creative editing that are commonly used may lead to misrepresentation and unfair portrayals of some of the parties involved, exploiting the very human aspects of the interactions entirely simply to entertain the audience while leaving the involved parties open to unfair scrutiny or ridicule. (Maybe we can expand on this using published sources, as suggested by DanielCD) | |||
| ==External links== | ==External links== | ||
Revision as of 20:05, 1 December 2005
Wife Swap is a reality television program, produced by UK independent TV production company RDF Media, and first aired in 2002 on Channel 4 in the United Kingdom.
Two families, usually with vastly different social classes, swap wives for a week. The women try to fill their counterpart's role, usually not succeeding particularly well. The adopted family also tries to cope with the change. However, the husband usually fares worse than the children.
Each wife leaves a house manual which explains their role in the family and the duties they hold. When they swap, they attempt to keep up with the demands set by their new lifestyle, which usually includes a greatly increased (for one, decreased for the other) level of housework. Half way through the week the roles are somewhat reversed with the family having to abide by the rules set by the new wife.
At the end, the women meet for the first time and along with their partners, discuss how they feel about the two weeks. This often descends into personal insults and rows.
A celebrity Wife Swap saw Charles Ingram's wife, Diana, swap with Jade Goody of Big Brother fame.
Spin-offs
The program format is reported to have been sold to various countries around the world. In late 2004, in the US, the format was remade on ABC and copied as Trading Spouses on Fox. Some episodes of the American version of Wife Swap were shown on British television (also in late 2004). Along with another "steal", was FOX's Nanny 911 from ABC's Super Nanny.
A spin-off of the show, Boss Swap, aired as a series in the U.K. A pilot for a U.S. series aired on ABC, but the show never made air. Husband Swap and Vacation Swap pilots were also aired in the U.S., but were not ordered to series.
Wife Swap was spoofed in an episode of Hope & Faith with Wynonna Judd guest starring.
Legal issues
In November of 2005, a participant on the show sued ABC network for trading his wife for a gay man. He accused ABC of being dishonest, not allowing him contact with his own wife, and making him miss college classes. He is suing for over $10,000,000.
"Reality TV" vs Reality
Some critics of the show and of the genre, in general, feel that the mechanisms of creative editing that are commonly used may lead to misrepresentation and unfair portrayals of some of the parties involved, exploiting the very human aspects of the interactions entirely simply to entertain the audience while leaving the involved parties open to unfair scrutiny or ridicule. (Maybe we can expand on this using published sources, as suggested by DanielCD)