Reality TV With years of experience, and the arrival of social networks, the public is increasingly calculating their votes
Star Academy nominees of the week, illustration — TF1 screenshot
- The emergence of social networks, polls and other people’s voting indications push reality TV viewers into the logic of useful voting, to the detriment of passion and spontaneity.
- The public is also more knowledgeable and has hindsight than 20 years ago, limiting flames and votes in the wind.
- Fans are doubling their ingenuity and strategy in order to make their vote as relevant as possible and to maximize it as much as possible.
Last week, at the Star Academy, Tiana, Anisha, Julien and Stan were named. Julie, 25 years old and big fan of Tiana, voted; for… Anisha in order to save her little protege. A shot of billiards at; three Machiavellian bands that she explains with more or less clarity: “Un nom is saved by the public, another by the remaining candidates. Polls and estimates showed Anisha and Julien leading the public vote, with Tiana trailing by a wide margin. The difference between Anisha and Julien is that we all suspected that Julien would never be saved; by the other candidates. Anisha, more popular at the castle, could be. It was therefore better to vote for Anisha, so that she would be saved by the public, leaving the field open to the audience. Tiana from being saved by the other candidates.” Easy as pie, right?
The useful vote, so dear to the political life of the country, would have interfered; in telecrochets? With the emergence of social networks, absent during the beginnings of reality TV, in France, it is much easier to estimate the popularity rating; of such and such a candidate, and their chances of survival. A knowledge that generates apothecary calculations and debates on the relevance of such and such a vote.
The end of innocence, the beginning of utility
“In the first editions of Star Acet al., voting for a candidate was something new, so it’s more spontaneous, more personal, more affective as well”,” Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS) and specialist in reality TV. The first editions of reality television with public vote, whether Loft Story or Star Academy, date back to 2001, i.e. before the explosion of the useful vote in political debate. “The concept was there before, but it’s been changed. much more evoked; after the first round of 2002 and the elimination of Lionel Jospin, when the total of the votes for the left weighed more than 40 %”, contextualizes Rachel Garrat-Valcarcel, political journalist at the 20 Minutes that we were allowed to disturb for the occasion.
Les gars il faut jouer stratégie au vue des sondages, tiana ne sera pas sauvée. On sauve anisha et les élèves sauveront tiana.
Séparer les voix entre tiana et anisha c’est faire revenir julien. pic.twitter.com/1WIKzXq1mX
— Paloma Banana (@BananaPaloma)
Access to this content has been blocked in order to respect your choice of consent
I‘ACCEPT
More information on the Cookie Management Policy page.
20 years later, end of innocence and heart. Last week, seeing her favorite Stan far behind, Marine, 30, voted; for Julien: “I said to myself that I was going to vote for the least worst candidate and who had a chance of passing anyway. Voting Stan wouldn’t have changed anything; in the game, he was screwed, whereas a vote for Julien could have more influence.” Like a flavor of the first round of the 2022 presidential election.
In addition to giving estimates, social networks make it possible to organize voting campaigns. On Twitter in particular, by following the hashtag #StarAc, you will come across many indications of the most strategic vote to be taken. do according to your preferences and your favorite candidates. “The social media effect, especially with polls, makes it possible to somewhat break the bubble of ”Everyone votes in their own corner”, and to organize support raids that are certainly more effective” ;, believes Justine, 27 and avid fan.
An audience with more perspective
Useful voting supposes its opposite. : the judged vote “Useless”. Seeing his other darling, Chris, widely distanced; in the polls, Marine had decided; not to use his telephone: “ Ç nothing, and I would pass for a moron to losing my pennies for someone who is screwed.” A pragmatism and a side rational as Nathalie Nadaud-Albertini notes: “Compared to the first editions, the public has more distance, measure, restraint on its favorite candidates. He likes them, but is less in pure emotion, because 21 years have passed and the phenomenon has normalized. I have testimonials from the first editions where people were frantically voting for their favorite, not caring whether he had any chance of winning. Before, we voted with the heart, now with the head.” Not to mention that the economic period has changed a lot, continues our expert: “The beginning of the 2000s was more serene economically. Today, just as we consume useful, we vote useful.”
Useful voting doesn’t even need a poll to exist. “Even without an estimate, a resident of the 16th arrondissement of Paris can guess that her or his mayor will not be on the left,” illustrates Rachel Garrat-Valcarcel. During the last season of Dancing with the Stars, the candidate Thomas Da Costa, quickly the worst dancer among the participants, was saved multiple times by the public, well helped by his duet with Elsa, àgrave; the big popularity. A choice that drove a good part of the fans crazy, sometimes to the point of imagining downright devious plans. “We should have stop scattering our votes, all choose the same candidate and put him number 1 in the public vote so that Thomas is not saved yet. and be eliminated. by the jury”, visualizes Julie.
Not the monopoly of the heart
The fact remains that the more the weeks pass, the more the public becomes attached and the more the useful vote yields face to face. unreason and passion. “The big difference this season, pushing the commitment of voters and especially in communication on social networks, is the implementation of live. The perception of candidates differs so much if you follow the dailies or the live… &Cedilit gives the impression that the public of the live, me the first, feels invested with a mission, to restore the ”real” image of the candidates,” believes Justine. She takes the example of the candidate Julien: “For a while, we saw him working very late on the live, being the one who went to bed the latest, but during the daily we do not saw that his side ”I’m not going to class””.
” hard. Some of the spectators vote for her for the sole purpose of supporting her after her childhood ordeals,” notes Nathalie Nadaud-Albertini. She draws a parallel with Magalie Vaé, winner of the Star Academy 5 that she didn’t fit into the shackles of the music world, and voted for her in order to support her in this fight, far from any calculation, strategy and other voting utilities. Viewers are no longer voting with their heads anymore, but rest assured, their hearts are still beating.