Is it all about who has the X Factor?

Has reality television shaped more than we think?

Who would have ever thought that Saturday night television could transfigure our society? That Gary Barlow, Kelly Rowland and, God forbid, Louis Walsh could not only obliterate our Saturday night socialising but develop our political landscape? As the current presidential campaign progresses, it becomes more reminiscent of the race to be crowned reality show winner, very often a feat of personality rather than talent or ability, than the president of Ireland.  Reality television logistics have expanded, begging the question: is the talent show structure governing this politicalcampaign ?                                                                                  

Until next year, the X Factor auditions have drawn to a close. For those of us who will miss the lunacy, drama and desperation of the audition process, then fear not. There is a bigger and better circus in town: pop on down to Dublin for what appears to be open castings for the Irish presidency. Why not give it a go; everyone else has decided to. As the line-up sees a gay exuberant, a former Eurovision song contest winner and an ex-terrorist in the mix, the campaign ensures to grant the eccentricity and diversity that reality television is famed for. The argument emerges that it exceeds reality; the likelihood of being in the same room with such an assorted group would prove bizarre- this is no longer a mere political campaign. The quest for a national leader seems to be fused with some kind of hunt for the country’s most colourful character, entangled in our media obsessed culture. Of course, no-one succeeds in these contests on mere talent- much too mundane. The aspirant singers delve into their private lives, the most promising always having the obligatory sob story of how they have come through such pain, loss and suffering, dedicating songs to their recently deceased pet and so forth. The presidential candidates would do well to learn this lesson. It is perhaps not always an intentional move from the candidates but it is those with the most emphasis on their background that look set to do well. Martin Mc Guinness, undoubtedly the most controversial candidate of the campaign, embodies the X Factor role of the reformed rebel who has been saved by his talent. Mc Guinness uses this troubled, violent image in many ways to his advantage, urging people to forget his past and look to the future, emphasising his role in Northern Ireland’s reconciliation and branding himself as a poet of peace. The atrocity of his former role as an IRA commander will unquestionably cost him votes but his progression from those days will invoke other ticks on the ballot paper in support of the seemingly transformed Derry man.                                                                                              

Subsequent to successful nominations, the usual dance routines, harmonies and solos are replaced with interviews, press conferences and prying eyes in the campaign’s version of boot camp. This political training is no picnic for these contenders: grilling interviews, the constant anxiety of that photograph resurfacing and endless scrutiny and mockery- ‘all kinds of everything’ for Dana and her competitors. Oh, how fun this boot camp is-for us obviously,not them.

The factor has often faced accusations of farce and it is now transpiring that elements of the presidential race are subject to the same form of manufacturing. Senator David Norris’ appearance on Friday’s Late Late show was one of great expectation and curiosity. The selectivity of Norris as the only potential candidate to appear on the nation’s most watched show triggers significant and detrimental effects on the result of the political race. Transmitting to an audience of over one million people, the senator’s appearance enabled him to communicate to more voters in ten minutes than the other contenders could in a week of campaigning. The issue of Norris’ exclusivity to RTE raises questions as to the interview’s sincerity, his appeal to Ryan Tubridy, ‘When are we going to get to the good stuff’ an indication that there was an understanding between the broadcaster and politician of what would be addressed to benefit both parties. Perhaps, on this occasion the campaign should have directed itself towards the more equilibrium question time and left the stage handling to Cowell’s media hyped show.  It seems all figures in the public eye embrace the ‘no publicity is bad publicity’ mantra.                                                                                                  

And so the question remains, who will succeed to the all important live finals on the 27^th
of next month? It will surely be a moment that mirrors the talent shows electricity and vivacity of the ultimate hurdle but does the same go for the curse of the fast rising talent show champion? Just like the talent show’s winner, restricted by managerial decisions, the amount of difference the victorious figure will be allowed to make in this largely ceremonial role is questionable. Perhaps the race will prove more significant and absorbing than its unknown conclusion but like with any long-running reality show the inevitable question arises- What will we watch now?