Over the summer, I spent a lot of time watching talk shows and reality television. For one hour a night, people would exploit themselves for validation from the public. They presented the worst version of themselves without even realizing it, and I found it wholly and entirely captivating. 

New reality shows focus mainly on romance. Shows like Love Island and Love is Blind have accumulated a large audience over the years, as their representation of attractive individuals single-mindedly interested in physical intimacy captivates the general public. Reality television has seemed to devolve over the years, becoming more of an outlet to gawk and judge rather than examine and understand. Television was at its best when it was focused on the disgustingly entertaining idea of the idiocracy of the human mind. 

The Springer Experience

Former Cincinnati mayor Jerry Springer created a space that comforted the audience at home by saying: you are not like them. Springer and his community would gather and listen talk-show style to the people’s utterly insane problems: Sugar, Spice, and Slapped so Nice, following the lives of individuals searching for sugar daddies, Half-time Hookups with your wife, which suspects cheating wives and hookups with friends, and Update: Our brother is a Pimp! Is self-explanatory. Through interview questions, the ‘client’ would reveal their problem. Then they would bring out guests and contributors to the situation, whether it was family members or those directly involved, to hear their side of the story, positively or negatively. Springer would ask more questions, attempting to help move the situation along and understand why these people decided this fate. Often, these interviews end with fights between jealous men and wigs on the floor. 

Springer had this comforting way of making people talk. He’d take these problems and form them into valid, thought-provoking questions, causing his clientele and audience to rethink their entire situation. Because of the time period (with the show running from 1991-2018), the situations presented are dated, with questions about sexuality or gender standing being very prominent and addressed problematically. But his questioning and discussion formed a strange kind of audience acceptance toward the client.

In a time where being entirely yourself wasn’t accepted, Springer made it normal by comparison. It was validating, in a sense, to have people support you without actually knowing you, even if it was for a mistake you made or a relationship with someone you shouldn’t have. Despite the insanity, Springer made it okay to be authentically yourself. 

As relationships become more complex and diverse, the issues that were so controversial on the Jerry Springer Show are barely a conversation anymore.  Without this aspect of absurdity, I ask myself the question: 

Will there ever be another Jerry Springer? 

For a niche subgenre of television, Springer created a community where it was perfectly acceptable to come as you are and chat with the other side. While authenticity is a completely normal part of life for so many more people today, it was empowering to see someone on National Television encouraging behavior that wasn’t entirely accepted at the time. It’s super important to have that outlet of expression, even if the context in which it was presented was a little off-color.  People often enjoy hearing about the turmoil of others. We are creatures of habit, getting far too involved in business that isn’t our own but somehow relating to it. Springer created this new era of gossip, understanding, and conversation.

This type of television isn’t as common today, nor is it really something people seek. They aren’t looking for an hour-long conversation; they’re looking for the cliff notes, a quick description of a sporadic conversation, but from this, we’ve created other ways of forming community.