★★★★★ 0/5

“The absolute cesspit of TV”

News Breakfast host Michael Rowland says what we're all thinking about MAFS cheating and adultery.

27
Leave a comment

News Breakfast host Michael Rowland has slammed Married at First Sight describing it “a show that encourages cheating and adultery. What sort of message is this show setting to teenagers like mine, who I’m trying to teach about the nature of stable, loving relationships?”

27 Responses

  1. Yet hours later, the ABC sent out a tweet promoting Ask me anything (whatever it’s called) with an African guy talking about his appendage….

  2. Entertainment? Really? The comment about the lowest common denominator is so true. I am so glad we have pay tv. I rarely watch free to air these days.

  3. Just noticed that 8 or the 10 trending topics on Twitter in Melbourne are MAFS-related. I’d rather watch the inside of my eyelids. G’night folks.

  4. Sadly, the lowest common denominator have the power (read: advertising dollar) when it comes to these types of shows. Commercial TV has evolved, but intelligent programming are migrating to other avenues (SVOD).

  5. Yeah I feel this is harsh. Particularly Julia – how does watching mean you are condoning gaslighting and bad behavior? If anything it’s actually allowed me to have conversations about such behavior with others. I think there’s an argument to be had about how the producers may be interfering/encouraging cheating to happen in the first place, but as others have said the reaction from fellow contestants and the public in general is pretty unequivocal – these people are condemned not celebrated. Whether the cheaters really care though, I don’t know. I think for them the ultimate goal is as much air time and exposure as possible. I would like to see the experts clearly come out and deal with the persistent trend of some contestants (e.g. Davina, Ines, Jess) being prepared to trample over everyone and believing that literally any act is justified if the end result is their own happiness…

  6. As much as I agree with Michael, I would also be seriously worried if his kids ever thought “well they did it on MAFS, if must be ok” – I’m sure his kids are smarter than that & can identify MAFS as nowhere near a normal situation

    1. That’s why the notion of that argument is ridiculous. There are far worse things depicted on TV than cheating and lying worth worrying about. Yet it’s all presented as entertainment on a TV show so who actually cares that much, we all know what is acceptable to apply to our own lives alongside what exists through a reality tv series.

  7. I’m highly concerned for the welfare of the participants. So many have said they have been suicidal or suffering other mental health problems after the show. I think it goes too far in glorifying and accepting bad behaviour – behaviour that the show runners know will leave the participants hurt emotionally and also crucified on social media. What if the unthinkable happens? You’d have to think there would be serious consequences for the program makers, the network and experts to face the wrath of the law. They’ve had enough warnings that this could happen, I’m not sure they could defend themselves by saying they didn’t expect it. My opinion is that they are putting ratings well before the mental health of a lot of people and I don’t think it’s right.

  8. The Show is absolutely ridiculous who in their right mind would marry somebody they have just met on a TV Show I would never do it – The Show should be banned immediately

  9. Well said Michael and Julia. Heaven knows why this pile of televisual crap from the foul depths of the ‘reality show’ cesspit is so popular; but, popular it is – its good ratings attest to that. However, popularity doesn’t necessarily equate with quality. Each Monday evening thousands of intellectual lightweights break out the Sav Blancs, the cheap fizz, and the Crownies, and settle their backsides on Harvey Norman couches, recliner chairs, and bean bags to watch this load of sub-intellectual bollocks. This show alone confirms that Australian ‘reality’ television has finally hit absolute rock bottom; if that is possible given the stiff opposition (e.g. Gogglebox, The Batchelor, anything Kardashian, I’m A Celebrity etc). A true indictment on our society that so many consider it ‘entertainment’.

    1. That is a rather harsh assessment, I agree the show is utter trash, but it is also an escape and entertainment for 1.8 million homes none the less, and Harvey Norman does a fine couch, and chardonnay is nice relaxing drop. And although I also feel you get dumber watching, your assumptions lead me to believe that a network filled with programs that meet your intellectual standards will be, to be blunt, boring as house bricks. And beanbag bashing, don’t sink to a level where one bashes the comfort and buttock conforming awesomeness of a beanbag.

  10. It’s funny because I always feel like a lot of the people on married at first sight, seem like they most definitely would have been sheltered teenagers?

  11. Bravo, Michael. Base is one word to describe this despicable, concocted confection of how human beings should not conduct themselves. Lies, unnecessary aggression, betrayal and disgusting behaviour should be considered the pits in our society. Instead MAFS celebrates this as the norm. Australians are by the most part decent people but how much damage is MAFS doing to impressionable youngsters who sadly have access to this low-rent television lie? MAFS is not a reflection of our society; it is a made-up TV game concentrating on the viler aspects of human behaviour.

      1. I disagree. Home and Away is a scripted drama that aims to tackle issues in society. I know that one current storyline addresses education of Epilepsy and has tackled other topics in the past.
        Yes relationship dramas feature, but also highlights consequences of behaviours and the actors go home healthy without mental health issues from the “reality experience”

        1. And the impressionable youngsters that are up at 7pm are fully aware it is a scripted drama?
          The ‘relationships’ are a series of characters jumping from one partner to another acting in an immoral manner, stealing, lying, doing drugs etc. etc.. The transgressors in MAFS seem to face more consequences from the group than their fictional counterparts.
          I also think the percentage of those employed full time in the industry with mental issues and scarring far exceed those of the casual reality show participant.

          2. Having not watched the MAFS, I wouldn’t know what consequence they face from the group, I gain information from articles here and viewers opinions. Also unsure of statistics to support the mental health concerns of actors in the industry, especially compared to the more frequent reports of concern for reality participants. (David I would be interested to know if full time actors have a high level of mental health concerns, any way of verifying this?)
            I agree there is immoral behaviour in H&A but usually the characters eventually face the consequences for their actions. We will just have to disagree that H&A is comparable.

          3. Plus one is fiction, the other is presented as “actual” and that’s a big difference. There is a doco on mental health in the arts The Show Must Go On made by Ben Steel, you can see teasers on YouTube.

  12. People vote with their remotes. Every episode this year has topped the weekly ratings. Twelve couples entered the experience and only three remain. If anything it shows that MAFS is purely entertainment, nothing else.

  13. I agree. Time to stop making ll these 20/30 something shows that offer nothing but bad ideas, adultery, lying, secrets, soul and marriage destroying. No wonder today’s society is in such a mess.

  14. How does it encourage cheating? Has he seen the backlash these people come under for doing exactly that lol. Absolutely crucified and hung out to dry by fellow contestants and the public who are clearly against their actions. If this is encouraging cheating then i must be watching the wrong show.

Leave a Reply