Neoliberal exploitation in reality television: youth, health and the spectacle of celebrity ‘concern’

Abstract Discourses about risk and responsibility are evident in the recent social panics surrounding childhood obesity that construct youth as necessary targets for saving. The public is not only asked to accept the problem of obesity but, often we are also asked to believe that only a highly sensationalized intervention can counter it. In this essay we argue that the obesity industry uses media to represent the 'problem' of obesity in ways that ultimately serve corporate interests and in ways that are antithetical to the well-being of youth. This phenomenon is made possible by the colonization of neoliberal ideologies in the social and cultural milieu of the USA. We argue that neoliberalism is a system of cruelty that gets theatrically enacted through reality television – a television subgenre that increasingly casts youth as its subjects. This paper analyzes the show Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution in an attempt to capture one manifestation of the exploitative damages of neoliberalism as well as to highlight its contradictory and harmful messages, especially as they relate to youthful bodies and their regulation. Keywords: neoliberalismreality televisionobesityyouthrisk Notes 1. The phrase 'obesity industry' is used variably in academic and professional contexts. Here we are referring to corporations and individuals who profit financially or increase their celebrity or political viability through the construction of the idea of an obesity 'problem' or 'epidemic.' This includes a host of companies like Weight Watchers and Atkins as well as celebrities and celebrity-politicians such as television chef, Jamie Oliver, and First Lady, Michelle Obama. 2. It should be noted that in the category of celebrity we mean to include highly visible politicians and other persons with strong political affiliations. We find this appropriate since in an advanced neoliberal society the line between political figures and celebrities becomes highly blurred. See, for example, the work of Jeremy Hockett (Citation2005). 3. We examine these celebrity efforts in light of Foucault's (Citation1985, Citation1991) analytic on how power works on subjectivities and how media's discursive practices make certain actions justifiable and/or particular constitutions of the self-possible (or impossible). Transcripts of the show were analyzed for keywords, phrases, and ideas and in light of the following questions: How did the problem of childhood obesity become the purview of celebrity intervention? How does the obesity industry attempt to inform children's corporeal realities and embodied subjectivities? Who benefits from the moral panics that are propagated and sustained by the obesity industry and in what ways? How does the spectalization of crisis surrounding obesity distract the public from examining related complex structural issues? What are the latent messages to schools associated with the dominant media portrayal concerning their obligations and responsibilities with regard to children's health? 4. These kinds of tactics reinscribe dominant discourses around poverty and ill health. They suggest that high fat content foods are chosen by working class and poor people and not by people of means. This is not to suggest that the Edwards family members are passive victims, but that they are portrayed as being part of a socioeconomic class that consistently makes poor choices with regard to nutrition. At the same time, issues that undergird these choices (that is, the existence of 'food deserts' in poor communities, the high cost of fresh and healthy foods versus the inexpensiveness of processed foods) are completely backgrounded. See, for example, Evans et al. (Citation2008a). 5. We are not making any claims about the agency inherent to the individuals in these shows. We fully acknowledge that individuals have the capacity to resist or take up Oliver's messages. Instead, we are suggesting that certain media representations truncate agency within the specific context of reality television. Specifically, we argue here that the individuals in these shows become caricatures owing to the fact that they do not have agency with regard to the ways in which they are represented. Because of the ways in which reality television shows are constructed, produced, and edited for any number of commercial ends, authentic subjectivity is, in some sense, often edited out of the final product. And, we argue, there are many moments in reality television shows when it would be contrary to the desired ends of the producers to represent these individuals as thoughtful, knowing, and self-reflexive.