I'd like to see them in very, very, very difficult situations, but I hadn't thought (before reading this) about the way it's being done.

Maybe I'd rather they were forced to work all day, pay for their own things, and live in the apartment they can afford after being paid from their day job.

Or we could catch, on camera, the looks on the faces of the spoiled ones (equal boys and girls, I wish) when their parents say, "You're out of the will." It might not be true, but the week after that would be fun to watch.

Can we address some of our own cultural issues first, before we start shipping teenage girls off to foreign countries, please?

Why not have these girls try to live on welfare, or work with a baby for a few weeks?

We've got enough issues that we could inform people about instead of trying to shock audiences with third world cultures (which is what they're trying to do, they're not working to inform people).

A waste of perfectly good progamming.

It's "scripted reality" or fake reality programming.
If we do not like it (I certainly don't appreciate it) then we ought not watch it and instead come up with better programming. We can get in the trenches pitching, and creating a girls club, and change the industry to support the sort of programming we can appreciate.

That (and any) show will stay on as long as it has good ratings and sponsors. Tune out and at the same time find out who the sponsors are and write to them. Sponsors listen to their customers.

I think the larger point of the show is to make fun of the spoiled brat, not to belittle the third world.

@Qwerty But by using the third world as a way to make fun of the spoiled (female) brat, they are belittling the third world.

We can watch the episode on line, but why would we want to?

I agree with jstein. It has long been my opinion that everyone should have to work in a "retail" job at least once in their life - why not have these girls (and, best case scenario, boys) do the same? It still wouldn't be "real," because of the cameras if nothing else, but it would be much more interesting.

I'm glad they sent those little brats to places where they can't have everything they want 24/7.

I have sporadic access to TV, so I can't comment on the show, but I do agree with the article excerpt in the original post.

Qwerty, "the larger point" is almost always different to the subtext. Example: "The larger point" of the recent Klondike Bar ads (U.S.) is to sell Klondike bars, but the subtext is "Men focusing on their partner and being attuned to her needs is a huge and unexpected feat that deserves major props!"

Shows like this might have a "larger point" of teaching spoiled brats a lesson, or what have you, but the subtext is screaming, "Third World! Other! Wow, non-Westerners!"

It's obnoxious in the extreme having Westerners swoop into the joint, cameras pointing, to capture the hijinks and hilarity and Teaching/Touching Moments of Westerner (any ethnicity) in the Bush.

Also, the dogged committment to inaccuracy and anachronism deserves protest. My family is from a country similar to the one in this show, and it always makes me laugh to see the way media and entertainment producers go out of their way to play up the "native flavor" and "tradition" of the locals. For example, does anyone know if this show reflects the fact that even the most "traditional" Masai bushmen today use cell phones as obsessively as urbanites; that many wear jeans under their traditional attire; and that many Masai "villages" and cultural centers on the Western tourist route are actually peopled by urbanized members of many tribes (including but not limited to Masai) for whom their presence is financially compensated?

What would really interest me would be a wealthy White or Black American going to Kenya and shadowing members of diverse, different classes and ethnic groups for a few weeks; then, they could switch places and have a Kenyan come to the U.S. and shadow a K-Mart cashier and a business executive--THIS would be an interesting and helpful fish-out-water show. THIS would indicate to Westerners that all countries and tribes in 2008 have diverse and complex layers and that cross-cultural learning encounters benefit all parties involved.

I am really glad to see these girls get their just deserts but I agree with jstein that they could have done the same thing in the US but highlighting the problems that people in their own damn country have to face constantly. Like just making a budget out of your meagre earnings. Wanna bet these girls can't even do that?

Also it did seem very scripted especially the fact that both the girls i saw (Amanda and Ava) ended up on the second to last day to find something they liked doing and actually were able to bond with their hostess. I think it would have been better if they had sent these girls to live there indefinately until they learned not to be so spoiled.

I hope that MTV does let Josephine and Ladee go visit them that would be really neat.

This reminds me of The Simple Life, that show that Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie had.

Why is it always women who end up on these shows? Where are the guys who piss off college, spend all day hung over and only clear up long enough to get drunk again? No, girls are the lazy ones who need to be taught a lesson.

I feel bad for them. If a child is that spoiled, its their parents' fault. I hope they learn something from the trip, but odds are the family and friends are pretty responsible for the state they're in.

I completely agree, the show is a horrible concept because they make Africa the worst thing in the world, and the girl Amanda was INSANELY offensive and completely rude!!!!
I like the concept of having these brats taken away from their money and spoiled life, but we don't have to send them to Africa to get the message that she is priviledged across. There are many ways they could make these girls see another perspective... have them volunteer in their communities and see how other people only miles or a few towns away from them live under the poverty level...

ugh, gross.

i agree with the idea of having these girls work for their own support or something that doesn't exploit or misrepresent other cultures.

of course, what i'd really like is to stop making shitty reality shows about spoiled brats in the first place. these girls will come back and feel like they are still hot shit because they are on television and by extension, FAMOUS. it's shows like my super sweet sixteen and the hills and the simple life and even scripted shows about ridiculously privileged teenagers that helps build up this ongoing fascination with profligate youth in the first place.

i try to pay less attention to the activities of useless celebrities, even when they are funny, for precisely this purpose. if we stop buying magazines with paris hilton on the cover, maybe they won't try to force paris 2.0 down our throats when this one gets too old to play the role. i know it's a long shot, but i try to do my part. these people are obnoxious.

Personally, I find that to be a positive opportunity to be able to travel to another continent, experience a new culture, and learn new things -- I don't believe it should be treated as a punishment.

I understand the concept of the show, but why hail these spoiled brats any more? The solution: quit watching MTV and provide better things for our children to do.

Isn't the title enough? "Exiled."

These women aren't being sent to learn about other cultures, they're being "punished"...and the implication is that being in a different culture like those in Africa should not be a pleasant, illuminating experience.

This show lampoons both the women and the cultures involved. All for our amusement.

I'm really disappointed that most people have overlooked the gendered aspect of this show.

Nightingale, guys and girls were both featured on Sweet Sixteen. So you're right - why are the girls the only ones to be "shamed" on the follow up? In the only episode I saw this young guy acted as if he "owned" Rihanna or that he was somehow better than her because his dad paid her to sing at the party. He was acting as though it was a privilege for Rihanna to be in his company. I think it's disgusting. Do girls make better cry-babies, or is it just more fun to watch women 'suffer'?

I just watched the second episode of Exiled, didn't see the first. MTV's logic seems to be that the female makeover/weightloss/celebrity-wannabe shows are getting tired, so lets find a new way make girls feel even "worse" about themselves.

So they're guilting these spoilt young girls who know nothing different because their parents are nitwits, and then patronizing the impoverished without explaining that it is the impoverished that make the global economy work in the whole of America's favor.

Blame poverty on young spoilt women. Easy targets. Way to go TV executives.

One more thing;

Is it not ironic that these girls are simply behaving in their every day lives in the way that advertising and tv programs want them to?

They pump out The Hills and whatever else, get girls to dress up like dolls and tell them that status is derived from what handbag they carry, then take it all away and say;

"Ignore every message that television and advertising has ever tried to sell you or teach you. You are ungrateful and spoilt. Now feel bad about it and we'll film you"

Confusing. I'm not trying to justify the way these girls behave, just pointing out the irony.

I agree with a lot of the criticisms posted hear, but I will say that Amanda did make a good point at the very end of the show when she said that just because people didn't live like we do in America it doesn't mean they are unhappy.

*here... sorry I'm on the verge of falling asleep.

"Spoiled rich girl": 42400 hits on Google.
"Spoiled rich boy": 7590.

"Materialistic girls": 4320
"Materialistic boys": 97
"Materialistic women": 8310
"Materialistic men": 2330

Yep, it's open season on women and girls.

I agree that it would be more interesting television to stick some rich kids (and not just girls) into an underprivileged situation within the US.

However, from a TV exec's standpoint I can see that sticking clueless rich teenagers into inner-city America would be far too dangerous and depressing.

The Masai are freaking awesome though! I would give almost anything (I materially own, probably not a limb...maybe a toe) to go live with them for a week! I'm surprised she doesn't have to drink blood (they mostly subsist off blood and milk). Anyway, yeah the show seems stupid, annoying, and exploitative (like most reality TV), but mostly it makes me jealous. Plus, yeah it's annoying that they are treating these people like a bad thing but I wouldn't feel bad for the Masai. They are not naive (almost any movie or show with Africans in it have Masai) and so probably know the show is lame and are just getting some entertainment and money from the whole event.

Yes! Conversely, wouldn't it be far more interesting to take some poor American kid, who would not otherwise have the financial opportunity to travel and see other cultures, to live with the Masai for a week? It is an awesome opportunity, so why waste it on the rich?

@sal: Is it not ironic that these girls are simply behaving in their every day lives in the way that advertising and tv programs want them to?

That's exactly why the tabloids delight in tearing down Britney, Lindsey, Paris, et al.

They are pushed into and praised for behaving a certain way, and then they are torn down with such savage glee its sickening.

Now, I'm not saying these girls are angels or even good role models.

What I mean is that there is truly no safe way for a woman to "be;" you are always too much or not enough of something.

sal and wickendwench, excellent point.
no woman can every really win this game.

Zoray - AGREED!

I would LOVE to see a show that was the anti-matter of this c**p.

Take a less advantaged kid ( male or female, American or wherever) picked because they are *trying hard* with what they have and give them a week or two of all the money and resources that a TV show is squandering on this bilge.

Like - just for episode one? (Just since we seem to be doing Masi here ) Pick a Masi girl that is the top of her high school class and let her plan a week of going wherever in the world she wants and meeting all the people she thinks she could learn from. Then - on the last day - let her pass on the impressions and what she has learned from the week. ( or whatever)

Repeat every week with a different interesting young person from a different part of the world.

Just from what they asked for we would learn a lot - and then afterwards we could learn from what they discovered - and most of all it would reward the creative and striving - not 'fake spank' spoiled brats for the micro sadism of the couchspud audience..

Emily,

I mean you no disrespect when I suggest that your post is a very good example of the Othering I was talking about in my post above. There was a wonderful Community post about this a few weeks ago, by Habladora, called "Smiling Othering," that I recommend.
-------------------------------------
Emily wrote:

"The Masai are freaking awesome though! I would give almost anything (I materially own, probably not a limb...maybe a toe) to go live with them for a week! I'm surprised she doesn't have to drink blood (they mostly subsist off blood and milk). Anyway, yeah the show seems stupid, annoying, and exploitative (like most reality TV), but mostly it makes me jealous."
--------------------------------------------

I understand that when people of a Western background tell me "Oh my gosh! I love your culture!" and "That's so cool! Have you ever gone through a RITUAL?" (to which I respond, "Yes, I was baptised!") they mostly mean no harm. But just because someone does not intend harm does not mean harm is not being done.

When I say "you" below, I mean people who make comments similar to yours above:

Holding up ethnic groups (or any social group) as "awesome" sends the subtle but inescapable message that (1) My individuality has gone out the window: to you, I am first and foremost a member of my "group," a placeholder; (2) I'm a repository for your enthusiasm and curiosity, and also a source of the anecdotes and cultural knowledge you want, but my reactions and opinions otherwise don't matter to you; (3) some bit of invisible "privilege" means you are not uncomfortable about potentially exposing any ignorance you might have. At the same time, it's embarassing and uncomfortable for *me*, as a group member, to have to correct misinformation or opinions that the other party bubbles over with, or to gently point out that some of their statements are not in the best taste.

I'm sure you've felt/been Othered at some time in your life; everyone--even middle-class, older, sighted/non-disabled, average weight, European-American, etc. men--has been marginalized in some way! If you think back to your experiences being singled out and pummelled with comments you may have found uncomfortable, did it really make a difference to you that the person doing the Othering was "Smiling"?

Thanks for considering this.

Racist, sexist, classist. Yes. I'm assuming that the people responsible for this show were aware of this prior to filming. It would be difficult for these blatantly obvious issues not to be at least brought up at some point.

Maybe they were aware that this may generate some controversy, even press, and generate more viewers.

But the real question is have you considered switching your car insurance yet?

My point is this: I think this may have been intentional. Under the assumption that this show is eliciting a strong (even if negative) emotional response in people, does the advertising make a more memorable impression?

Its show likely was plotted out with a short run, so a majority negative response isn't going to impact the network significantly, and may make the show more appealing to advertisers for the reason above. A few days, weeks after viewing the show the viewers may not even recall which advertisements were shown; yet tying emotions with an advertisements makes a definite impact (even if unconsciously).

Could this be an overt advertising strategy?

I agree with those of you who are saying that it was a marketing scheme. I mean there is no way that they were unaware that many people would be offended by the whole idea of the show. I mean look at how many of us are talking about it, and I wonder how many of you are going to watch it now, just to see for yourself what the show is like. They don't care why you watch just as long as you tune in.

On the subject of Africa, it is always misrepresented here in the west. We're always shown the bad neighbourhoods, and whatnot on the news. As for the dung huts, for us that seems disgusting, and inhumane, but you have to realize that there are cities in Africa, people do live in concrete buildings. Some of the people we see might actually be too poor to afford to move to the city. But I am sure that is not always the case. One of my coworkers is from Senegal, and we talk about this a lot, because it's something that bothers her very much, Senegal is a developed African country with a big tourism industry, (kids from Europe go there for vacation all the time). But everytime she sees her country on the news here it is represented as being this poor undeveloped country where everyone lives in dung huts, ana all have flies on them at all times, which is so far from reality, they only show us the 'ghetto'. And this show is just another part of it, by showing that the 'worst' place to put these girls is 'the disgusting,Aids ridden, dung hut land of Africa'. This is the underlying message that people take from this kind of bull shit media misrepresentation. Ugh!

On that note I leave you with this song to look up. NOFX- Kill all the white man.

Okra

Hmm, see your point about othering but I just generally thing different cultures, religions, etc. It doesn’t mean all I see in a person is the various groups they could fall in (mine being European American, Middle-class, Biology major, Anthropology minor, athiest, part of the Fresno-Clovis community, etc.), just that different groups have certain trends that I find interesting. I think different subsistence strategies are of interest not because they or “weird”, but because they show human ingenuity and basically, all the different ways we can survive. The idea that the Masai have found a way as pastoralists to live off their cattle without diminishing their herd is really awesome and might be of some use in a post apocalyptic world (something I’m kind of obsessed with). Yeah, no single person of a group is representative and no group is isolated from others so there is allot of blending and overlap. So if someone identifies with a group, say Free Will Baptist, I may be curious if they talk about their church ritual or mythology (not meant as false but in the sense that it is a story told by a group), but it doesn’t mean that what they say is the be all of Free Will Baptists or that being FWB is the only thing about them.

Basically, I don’t see the harm in taking interest in different groups and people. Everyone is different from me so even if they belong to most of the same groups I do, they are still a “other”, I just want to know what it is like being someone besides me because I recognize that I am not all there is to humanity and being human (which we all are and their is no “other“).

Actually they do have ONE guy on the show. I think his name is Bjorn or something like that. Yeah, I just looked it up on the episode list. He is Bjorn from Avon, Conneticut.

I saw him in the intro. Look at the passports.

Not saying that this still isn't stupid show.

The MTV producers went all the way to Thailand and did not even film the Thai Culture.
The Thai culture are of Malayan ancestry, wear sarongs and live in grass huts. The MTV producers just went with their cameras swinging and were obviously just as clueless about the country they were going to. The Karen tribe crossed the borders and are immigrants to Thailand and learn to build grass huts from the Thai culture.
That’s like sending Ladee to live with a Mexican girl who’s family crossed the border to the U.S. dropping her off in east Los Angeles and saying that this is how all Americans live. All MTV had to do was drop Ava on Skid Row in Downtown Los Angeles where all the homeless Americans live in card board boxes to see real life. Skid Row is only 1 hour from Beverly hills.
They did not even have to fly Ava to another country. All they had to do was drive her down the street to the other side of town.

The MTV producers went all the way to Thailand and did not even film the Thai Culture.
The Thai culture are of Malayan ancestry, wear sarongs and live in grass huts. The MTV producers just went with their cameras swinging and were obviously just as clueless about the country they were going to. The Karen tribe crossed the borders and are immigrants to Thailand and learn to build grass huts from the Thai culture.
That’s like sending Ladee to live with a Mexican girl who’s family crossed the border to the U.S. dropping her off in east Los Angeles and saying that this is how all Americans live. All MTV had to do was drop Ava on Skid Row in Downtown Los Angeles where all the homeless Americans live in card board boxes to see real life. Skid Row is only 1 hour from Beverly hills.
They did not even have to fly Ava to another country. All they had to do was drive her down the street to the other side of town.

I love it that daddy wanted to wisen her up. Um, hey dad, great idea: how about teaching your daughter her behavior is unacceptable as she grows up? Why not the first time she throws a teenage tantrum call her on it, and punish her then! Love how people who pamper and indulge their children for 16 years are so surprised when these little divas expect the world. Sorry, I don't blame the kids. They don't know any different. I wonder how much money, mommy and daddy made for this little lesson that they couldn't teach themselves.

Just a thought:

What if said brats were asked about their favourite clothing designer and then forced to work in the sweatshop for a week?

I know they'll never, ever do this, but it would be the closest you could get to actually making a lasting difference, as well as connecting the viewers and participants to something other than a vague, inaccurate exotic "otherness". It would connect to something we can relate to.