"Why Pop Star Academy: Katseye Missed the Mark for a Long-Time K-Pop Fan"

When I stumbled upon Pop Star Academy: Katseye on Netflix one Saturday afternoon, I couldn’t resist hitting “play.” This docuseries dives into the intense world of K-pop, following 20 trainees vying for a spot in the global girl group Katseye. The show quickly generated a lot of buzz, especially in Singapore, where one of the finalists, Megan Skiendel, is of half-Singaporean heritage. As a long-time K-pop fan, I was prepared for the usual elements: heavy editing to fit contestants into stereotypical roles, exaggerated conflicts, and a public voting system. However, Pop Star Academy presented three particularly troubling aspects: the production crew’s overt manipulation and deceit towards the contestants, their dismissive attitude towards participants’ concerns, and their simplistic justifications for these practices.

The rise of Korean reality entertainment globally prompts us to question the evolving ethical standards behind such shows and their impact on viewers. What obligations do producers of K-reality have towards both participants and audiences? For viewers like us, how do these distorted portrayals affect our understanding of the real people involved? Is it acceptable to tolerate such levels of manipulation?

American linguist Amanda Montell, in her 2021 book Cultish: The Language of Fanaticism, notes that we are inherently drawn to stories of conflict. K-reality taps into this by intensifying interpersonal drama with a sense of urgency and excitement, designed to keep viewers hooked.

In the realm of K-pop, where fan enthusiasm often borders on obsession, the portrayal of idols can become problematic. Instead of being seen as real people with their own lives and feelings, idols are often treated like mere game pieces in a high-stakes competition. Pop Star Academy exemplifies this issue by revealing how production crews manipulate storylines and omit crucial details. Contestants have spoken out about how the show exaggerated conflicts and tensions, a tactic common in K-pop survival programs. This manipulation leads to intense online debates among fans, who often argue over trivial matters unrelated to the idols' talents.

One particularly striking aspect of Pop Star Academy was the secretive nature of the public voting. A producer confessed on camera that keeping the results hidden was intended to "raise the stakes." When this fact was revealed, it caused significant distress among the trainees, with one girl even quitting a week later. Despite the backlash, the producer remained unapologetic, claiming that creating drama was essential for "entertainment.

Some viewers applauded the producer for being honest about the manipulative practices that have become standard in K-reality shows. However, many others criticized her for perpetuating these unethical practices rather than addressing them. In an industry where exploiting real people’s emotions for dramatic effect is increasingly normalized, her bluntness is seen by many as part of the problem, not a solution.

A 2017 study by experts from the University of Hong Kong revealed that “the more people view the ideas in reality TV as ‘normal,’ the greater the overall impact these shows have on society.” By presenting manipulation as an essential part of entertainment, shows like Pop Star Academy train viewers to accept, and even expect, a certain level of deceit. This normalization of unethical practices is already evident. On platforms like TikTok, many viewers shrugged off the producers' manipulative tactics, dismissing them as typical of K-reality shows. This desensitization is troubling because it risks altering our standards for fairness in real life.

When we dismiss unethical behavior with the excuse of “it’s just entertainment,” we may undermine our ability to critically evaluate the media we consume. If we accept the manipulation seen in shows like Pop Star Academy without question, it raises concerns about our tolerance for similar issues in other areas of media. For example, will we become more accepting of sensationalism and misinformation simply because they are more engaging than accurate reporting? The most significant danger may be a widespread erosion of empathy, where the line between reality and entertainment becomes dangerously blurred.

Frequent exposure to media that portrays manipulation and deceit can make us more accepting of these behaviors in real life, especially when these portrayals are presented under the guise of “reality.” The University of Hong Kong study highlighted that a constant diet of witnessing bad behavior can increase our tolerance for rudeness and even violence. This goes beyond just developing a critical or analytical mindset; it affects our capacity to empathize and show compassion—essential aspects of our humanity.

I understand the temptation to “switch off” when we relax with TV shows, and I feel it too. However, when media trends start to shape our beliefs and behaviors in harmful ways, it’s crucial to discuss how we can hold ourselves to a higher standard. A powerful example of this is the 2022 boycott by fans of the K-pop group Loona, which successfully led to the termination of the unfair contracts imposed by the now-defunct label Blockberry Creative. This collective action demonstrated that consumer power can effectively challenge and reject unethical practices. It reminds us that while media can influence us, we also have the power to demand better standards and hold organizations accountable.

In conclusion, the pervasive nature of media manipulation and deceit, especially in formats marketed as “reality,” can gradually erode our tolerance for unethical behavior and diminish our empathy. As media trends increasingly shape our perceptions and behaviors, it becomes essential for us to actively resist normalization of these practices and uphold higher standards. By critically engaging with the media we consume and supporting collective actions that challenge unfair practices, we can reinforce our commitment to integrity and compassion. Ultimately, our collective vigilance and demand for ethical treatment can drive positive change in both media and real-life interactions, ensuring that our values are reflected in the content we support and the world we live in.