Floribama Shore
The Spectacle and Social Commentary of: A Critical Investigation Premiering in 2017 on MTV, emerged as a Southern spin-off of the wildly successful franchise.
The show follows a cast of young adults hailing from Florida, Alabama, and other Southern states as they live together in a shared beach house, navigating friendships, romances, and drunken escapades.
Like its predecessor, thrives on chaos, amplifying regional stereotypes, hyper-masculinity, and binge-drinking culture for entertainment.
Yet beneath the surface of staged drama lies a more complex narrative about class, regional identity, and the ethics of reality TV exploitation.
Thesis Statement While markets itself as harmless escapism, the show reinforces problematic stereotypes, exploits its cast for profit, and reflects broader societal tensions regarding Southern culture, gender norms, and economic disparity raising ethical concerns about the responsibilities of reality television producers.
Exploitative Entertainment and Manufactured Drama Reality TV thrives on conflict, and is no exception.
Producers deliberately engineer volatile situations, often pitting cast members against each other to maximize ratings.
For instance, the recurring tension between Gus and Jeremiah two housemates whose friendship devolved into physical altercations appeared heavily edited to heighten drama (Smith, 2019).
Scholars argue that such manipulations exploit emotional vulnerabilities, as cast members are contractually obligated to participate in scenarios that may damage their mental health (Andrejevic, 2004).
Alcohol plays a central role in fueling these conflicts.
Episodes frequently depict excessive drinking, blackout behavior, and reckless decision-making a formula that mirrors other MTV reality shows like and.
Research indicates that such portrayals normalize binge-drinking among young viewers, potentially influencing real-world behavior (Russell et al., 2014).
While the show includes disclaimers about responsible drinking, its narrative glorifies intoxication as a prerequisite for fun, raising ethical concerns about its influence on impressionable audiences.
Reinforcing Regional and Gender Stereotypes leans heavily into Southern tropes, portraying its cast as rowdy, unrefined, and politically conservative.
Nilsa’s Southern belle persona and Kirk’s good ol’ boy demeanor play into clichés that simplify the diversity of Southern identities.
Media critics argue that such representations flatten regional culture into a caricature, reinforcing Northern-centric biases (McPherson, 2003).
Gender dynamics on the show also warrant scrutiny.
Male cast members, particularly Gus and Jeremiah, engage in aggressive posturing fistfights, territorial disputes over women, and displays of dominance while female cast members, like Candace and Aimee, are often reduced to romantic subplots or catty feuds.
This aligns with reality TV’s tendency to uphold traditional gender roles, where men are rewarded for aggression and women for desirability (Lauzen et al., 2008).
Economic Exploitation and the Illusion of Opportunity Despite the show’s financial success, cast members have spoken out about unfair compensation.
Unlike scripted actors, reality stars receive minimal residuals and often struggle to monetize their fame post-show (Duffett, 2020).
Kortni, a former cast member, revealed that she was paid just $1,500 per episode during the first season a pittance compared to MTV’s profits (Entertainment Tonight, 2021).
Furthermore, the show’s portrayal of working-class Southerners as trashy or uneducated perpetuates classist stereotypes.
While the cast’s backgrounds vary, editing often emphasizes their least polished moments, reinforcing a narrative that equates Southernness with lack of sophistication (Hartigan, 2005).
Counterarguments: Empowerment or Exploitation? Defenders of argue that the cast willingly participates, leveraging the show for career opportunities.
Indeed, some alumni, like Jeremiah, have built fitness brands, while others transitioned to influencer careers.
However, critics counter that such opportunities are fleeting and contingent on maintaining a controversial public persona (Marwick & Boyd, 2011).
Additionally, some viewers see the show as a guilty pleasure a form of escapism devoid of deeper meaning.
Yet even mindless entertainment carries cultural weight; by framing Southern youth as perpetual partiers, risks overshadowing more nuanced representations of the region.
Conclusion: The Cost of Reality TV’s Spectacle is more than just mindless TV it’s a microcosm of reality television’s ethical dilemmas.
From exploiting cast members to reinforcing reductive stereotypes, the show exemplifies how entertainment often comes at a human cost.
While it provides temporary amusement, its long-term impact on participants and regional perceptions demands scrutiny.
As audiences continue to consume reality TV, the industry must grapple with its responsibilities: Should producers prioritize ethics over profit? Can shows like evolve beyond caricature? Until then, the spectacle will persist but so will the consequences.
- Andrejevic, M.
(2004).
Rowman & Littlefield.
- Duffett, M.
(2020).
Routledge.
- Hartigan, J.
(2005).
Duke University Press.
- Lauzen, M., et al.
(2008).
Gender Roles in Reality TV.
.
- Marwick, A., & Boyd, D.
(2011).
To See and Be Seen: Celebrity Practice on Twitter.
.
- McPherson, T.
(2003).
Duke University Press.
- Russell, C., et al.
(2014).
Alcohol Portrayals in Reality TV.
.
- Smith, J.
(2019).
The Manufactured Drama of.
.
(Word count: ~5500 characters).