Three in five Americans believe reality TV has gone too far.

A new survey, conducted by Talker Research, comes after the controversial  Bachelorette  season 21 finale in which star Jenn Tran was forced to re-watch her engagement breakup on live TV. The episode saw fan backlash on social media with online conversations questioning the ethics surrounding the network’s decision to air the incident.

2,000 respondents were asked whether they felt reality TV has taken participants’ personal hurt too far in entertainment. More than half — 57% — believe it has. Many feel unscripted programs take too many liberties while monetizing participants’ traumatic moments.

Not only that, more than half of the Americans (56%) asked believe reality TV producers should be held accountable for the mental health of participants.

Nearly half of millennials polled (46%) say they are reconsidering watching the Bachelor/Bachelorette franchise. 45% admit the Jenn Tran incident made them reflect on the reality TV they consume.

“Viewers are sympathetic to reality show participants,” says Dr. Carole Lieberman, a psychiatrist-consultant for reality TV. “But would they watch such shows if they were all warm and fuzzy as compared to the ones that put participants in the most humiliating situations?”

Lieberman explains that in addition to viewers changing their minds on what they consider entertainment, other improvements should be made. “A good start would be to provide crisis aftercare for the participants in their home town, instead of quickly shoving them off the set and into cars taking them to the airport.”

Liberman has additional thoughts about potential policy changes for these unscripted shows to protect reality TV participants. “Reality shows should do more to evaluate the prospective participant’s mental health. Some shows have a psychiatrist-consultant, but the majority do not.”

“Reality show contestant contracts basically say that the production company isn’t responsible for anything that goes wrong, anything the participant didn’t expect, or any damages to their reputation or to their life. But, it says this in veiled language, while holding out the promise of fame and fortune as a carrot,” she adds.

Survey Methodology:

Talker Research conducted online surveys of 2,000 general population Americans between September 6 and September 11, 2024, utilizing:

• Traditional online access panels — where respondents opt-in to take part in online market research for an incentive.
• Programmatic — where respondents are online and are given the option to take part in a survey to receive a virtual incentive usually related to the online activity they are engaging in.

Those who did not fit the specified sample were terminated. Dynamic online sampling is used, adjusting targeting to achieve the quotas specified as part of the sampling plan.

Regardless of which sources a respondent came from, they were directed to an Online Survey, where the survey was conducted in English; a link to the questionnaire can be shared upon request. Respondents were awarded points for completing the survey. These points have a small cash-equivalent monetary value.

Cells are only reported on for analysis if they have a minimum of 80 respondents, and statistical significance is calculated at the 95% level. Data is not weighted, but quotas and other parameters are put in place to reach the desired sample.

Interviews are excluded from the final analysis if they failed quality-checking measures. This includes:

• Speeders: Respondents who complete the survey in a time that is quicker than one-third of the median length of interview are disqualified.
• Open ends: All verbatim responses, full open-ended questions as well as other please specify options, are checked for inappropriate or irrelevant text.
• Bots: Captcha is enabled on surveys, which allows the research team to identify and disqualify bots.
• Duplicates: Survey software has “deduping” based on digital fingerprinting, which ensures nobody is allowed to take the survey more than once.

This survey was only available to individuals with internet access, and the results may not be generalizable to those without internet access.