Should we be worried about reality TV glorifying toxic traits?

‘Do you watch Love Island?'

It's a question that seems to be on everybody’s lips at the moment. And the answer, 'no' seems to be on mine and mine only.

I’ve just always felt like: what’s the big deal?

I’m not saying I’m better than anybody else. God knows I have my guilty pleasures. But the idea of being into such a toxic display of what can only be described as a modern-day mating ritual is beyond me.

And while both genders typically act, how do I put it…untoward...claims of toxic masculinity, sexism, and misogyny have essentially become part of the genre.

Once upon a time, reality TV held up a mirror to society—showing us somewhat real people, in somewhat real situations.

The early days were about everyday dynamics and relatable, if messy, humanity. But somewhere along the way, this genre twisted into something far more extreme.

Now, it’s not enough to simply watch people live their lives. Today’s reality TV sells a hyper-dramatised circus, with characters who embody these toxic extremes of behaviour.

When we think about this same kind of toxicity that’s currently running rampant online, and the overlap of reality TV’s 'alpha males,' one has to question – do these shows glorify this behaviour enough for it to spill out into the real world?

Let’s take a quick trip down reality TV’s Hall of Shame.

Controversial characters likely to cause conflicts have always been first pick for cast.

Take a look at Big Brother Season 17, for example.

Influencer Andrew Tate (yes, that Andrew Tate) appeared on the show, before being ejected from the house after a video of him whipping a woman with a belt went public.

Or how about The Hills’ walking red flag Spencer Pratt leaving then-girlfriend Heidi Montag on the side of the road? Or Made in Chelsea’s Spencer Matthews’ repeated public cheating?

These shows have historically embraced the 'bad boy' trope. They look for personalities who will stir the pot, bring the drama, and keep viewers hooked, teaching us one clear lesson: the more explosive the personality, the more magnetic they were on screen.

Fast-forward to now, and today’s reality shows, from Love Island to The Bachelorette to Married At First Sight, still can’t resist the lure of the 'misunderstood' charmer.

Audiences and producers alike seem hooked on these divisive figures, who veer between suave and downright disrespectful. These shows love using selective editing to amp up their charm or amplify their toxic traits.

And evidently, it works.

Because these shows, while in part, are about 'finding love,' we all know they're very much focused on facilitating the next big drama.

It’s reality TV, after all. And drama is the currency.

Furthermore, the setting itself is the perfect breeding ground to exacerbate toxic behaviour.

Picture it: a group of people, cut off from the outside world, trapped in a house or on an island, with nothing to do but compete and perform for the cameras.

This is called 'the observer effect.' It's the 'phenomenon that causes individuals who might have been inclined to act aggressively, abusively or antisocially to modify their behaviour when they know they’re being filmed or recorded.'

This makes the setting in reality TV the perfect storm for bringing out the worst in people. Any mild personality quirk can escalate into something much darker under the constant spotlight.

This manufactured environment rewards behaviour that’s entertaining, even if it’s problematic.

The nastier or more confrontational someone is, the more screen time they get. And they know it. Today’s reality stars understand that a viral moment can turn them into overnight social media sensations.

Which makes bad behaviour all the more profitable.

At the end of the day, reality TV is a business—a ratings-driven business, at that.

Producers know that the more tension, conflict, and over-the-top antics they can pack into an episode, the more viewers will tune in.

And viewers eat it up.

There’s a dark irony here: reality TV sells us this 'authenticity' while carefully crafting characters to maximise conflict. This means producers are literally engineering conflict.

This ratings game raises some serious ethical questions. By repeatedly airing toxic behaviour, reality TV normalizes it.

And this subtly shapes how viewers—especially younger ones—interpret conflict and relationships.

It’s hard not to notice the overlap between reality TV’s 'alpha males' and the toxic influencers dominating the Manosphere.

These spaces glorify aggression, emotional detachment, and a certain brand of masculinity that’s as outdated as it is dangerous. Former reality TV 'bad boys' easily find a home here, with social media becoming an extension of their persona.

Some graduate from on-screen villain to online 'alpha,' cashing in on followers who idolise their 'unfiltered' style.

The effect?

A feedback loop where toxic traits aren’t just rewarded on screen. They're monetised online.

*Cough* Tate. *Cough cough* Stephen Bear.

So, what are the real-world consequences?

Studies show that viewers, especially younger ones, may absorb these toxic attitudes and behaviours, consciously or not. When we see bad behaviour rewarded on screen, it subtly shifts what we think is acceptable in real life.

Some fans may even defend these characters, rationalising their actions or admiring their 'confidence.'

The result?

A generation that’s grown up watching toxic masculinity play out on screen and online, influencing attitudes toward relationships, respect, and even self-worth.

Is there a path forward for the mess that is reality TV?

Reality TV no longer merely reflects reality itself—it shapes it.

As long as drama equals ratings, and ratings equal money, producers will keep casting people who make for explosive entertainment. But maybe there’s a way forward—a kind of reality TV where toxic traits don’t have to take centre stage.

Networks could try showcasing people who bring excitement through emotional intelligence or genuine connections, rather than aggression and ego.

However, that seems to me like a pipe dream.

Regardless, viewers can hold networks and producers accountable for the messages they’re putting out.

Because reality TV has the power to entertain without feeding a cycle of harmful stereotypes.

As blindly optimistic as it sounds, we don’t have to sacrifice good content for healthy content.

So, I propose a challenge: enjoy the show, sure, but stay critical.

And remember—there’s a difference between reality and the 'reality' we’re sold.

-Sophie, Writer