Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...  (Read 6994 times)

ssjason

  • Guest
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« on: July 02, 2003, 05:09:53 AM »
Well, this is interesting...and hadn't seen it posted about so far...

Check out Doug Landis Bio - BB&D2.

Yes, this is the same Doug Landis who appeared on Dog Eat Dog last Tuesday (6/24).  And like all good game show fans, seeing the same person on two shows in two weeks brings up eligibility questions in my mind.

And perusing the eligibility rules for BB&D, it looks to me like there could be some issues (didn't immediately see the eligibility rules for DED).  I posted up part of the rules on my site (they're long, didn't want to quote from them on here)...feel free to check them out.  The link is at the bottom of the message.  

Anybody else agree/disagree/got any thoughts...other than the obvious \"you knew they had to run out of people for these shows eventually\"?

-Jason E.

----------------------------
Jason Elliott
Webmaster, GSNN
Game Show NewsNet - InfoHub

uncamark

  • Guest
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #1 on: July 02, 2003, 07:54:12 PM »
Quote
Yes, this is the same Doug Landis who appeared on Dog Eat Dog last Tuesday (6/24).  And like all good game show fans, seeing the same person on two shows in two weeks brings up eligibility questions in my mind.

And perusing the eligibility rules for BB&D, it looks to me like there could be some issues (didn't immediately see the eligibility rules for DED). 


Here is the relevant paragraph from the application for \"Fame\"--the application for \"Fear Factor\" has the same wording, so I believe that this is NBC's standard eligibility policy:

I represent that I have not appeared as a contestant in more than two (2) television competition or game shows within the last five (5) years from the tape date of the episode(s) in which I may appear. In addition, I have not appeared as a contestant on more than one (1) television competition or game show within the past twelve (12) months from the tape date of the episode(s) in which I may appear (regardless of whether such appearance has been broadcast or cablecast).

Here's the relevant \"BBOD\" rule as quoted by Jason:

H. No Finalist has appeared on any national broadcast or cable network primetime television reality/game show\" [list deleted] \"that (i) has been telecast during primetime within one (1) year prior to Contestant selection or (ii) is intended to be telecast during primetime within one (1) year after Contestant selection.\"

Which by my interpretation means that Mr. Landis is ineligible for \"BBOD\" and it's highly possible that he didn't bother telling ESPN that he'd taped \"DED\" (I believe that \"DED\" taped their season at the end of last year/beginning of this year, since they were originally shooting for a mid-season time slot).  There's no indication in the task list of when \"BBOD\" occurred this year as in time-specific events (the first series was taped in the spring of 2001 and the task list included tasks related to the Kentucky Derby).

Since it's likely that \"BBOD\" is finished taping by now, I would say that ESPN got screwed by Mr. Landis and that they may have to put a disclaimer up on every episode (and this is something that, in my mind, would require Summer Sanders doing a detailed on-camera disclaimer on the first and last episode).  If his team wins, I hope he doesn't receive any of the prizes.

DrBear

  • Member
  • Posts: 2517
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #2 on: July 02, 2003, 09:28:53 PM »
Or maybe they could run them with a slight edit of the standard disclaimer:

\"Contestants must meet eligibility requirements\"


...and one guy didn't.
This isn't a plug, but you can ask me about my book.

ssjason

  • Guest
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #3 on: July 02, 2003, 09:38:36 PM »
[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 06:54 PM\'] There's no indication in the task list of when "BBOD" occurred this year as in time-specific events (the first series was taped in the spring of 2001 and the task list included tasks related to the Kentucky Derby). [/quote]
 There *is* one indicated task that is time-specific...getting a picture with one of the nets cut down by 2003 Final Four teams.  So that implies that the program was taped after March '03 (am I reading that right?).  

So, assuming the \"DED\" eligibility rules are the same as the other NBC shows, Mr. Landis is 100% eligible for \"DED\" since (as far as we know) he hadn't appeared on a game in the last year before the \"DED\" tape date.

But he seems to definitely be ineligible for \"BB&D2\"...unless he was selected as a contestant before 06/24/02...which is unlikely since \"BB&D1\" was only just finishing its taping at that time.

It'll be interesting to see if this is something EOE (ESPN Original Entertainment) might have caught on their own already.  I suppose we'll see Tuesday...though in the glut of reality shows at 8pm ET Tuesday the whole show could get lost.

ChuckNet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2193
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #4 on: July 03, 2003, 12:09:07 PM »
Quote
I represent that I have not appeared as a contestant in more than two (2) television competition or game shows within the last five (5) years from the tape date of the episode(s) in which I may appear.

But then, that didn't seem to be a problem for Skyler from the W! premiere, who turned up on DOD's debut just 2 mos later.

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious \"Chuckie Baby\")

uncamark

  • Guest
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #5 on: July 03, 2003, 12:34:35 PM »
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jul 3 2003, 11:09 AM\']
Quote
I represent that I have not appeared as a contestant in more than two (2) television competition or game shows within the last five (5) years from the tape date of the episode(s) in which I may appear.
[/quote]
Quote
But then, that didn't seem to be a problem for Skyler from the W! premiere, who turned up on DOD's debut just 2 mos later.


IIRC from last year at this time, we had determined that Skyler had taped his appearance on \"DED\" long before his appearance on \"Whammy!\"  \"DED\" taped between November 2001 and January 2002 (since in that time the accident involving a contestant during taping had made the news).  The first series of \"Whammy!\" taped in March and April of 2002, and if GSN's eligibility requirements are based on air dates, Skyler was eligible since his \"DED\" ep hadn't aired yet.  He was also eligible for \"DED\" because his appearance on \"Whammy!\" was taped and aired approximately 4 months after he taped \"DED.\"

Just another day in the exciting world of network S&P.

(BTW, I meant \"2002\" instead of \"2001\" for \"BB&D\"--the first series was to have been taped in the fall of 2001, but 9/11 postponed it six months.)

bttritle

  • Guest
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #6 on: July 04, 2003, 03:49:24 AM »
Landis may get out of this scott free for two reasons:  if the Fear Factor eligibility rules are similar enough to the DED rules, they only address any shows from the 12 months prior to his show airing.  

Second, the eligibility rules on the BBOD site only reflect the rules at the time they taped in April 2002.  They are not adequately updated to reflect taping in 2003.

Unless they actually bothered to update it, ESPN may not have to do a thing, because they simply got lazy.

Ben T.

HYHYBT

  • Member
  • Posts: 416
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2003, 02:47:14 AM »
Quote
H. No Finalist has appeared on any national broadcast or cable network primetime television reality/game show\" [list deleted] \"that (i) has been telecast during primetime within one (1) year prior to Contestant selection

Am I reading that wrong, or does that, as written, include reruns?
"If you ask me to repeat this I'm gonna punch you right in the nose" -- Geoff Edwards, Play the Percentages

Jimmy Owen

  • Member
  • Posts: 7452
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2003, 08:03:37 AM »
With duplicity at the heart of most reality shows, why would one need to be truthful when signing forms nobody ever reads?  I mean, how's the guy gonna lie to the other players on the show if he can't fib on the form? If he's good for the show, let him on!  Is there an S&P dept. anymore?  We are coming full circle.  I have a feeling that if the quiz show scandals would have happened today, no one would care!
« Last Edit: July 05, 2003, 09:31:22 AM by Jimmy Owen »
Let's Make a Deal was the first show to air on Buzzr. 6/1/15 8PM.

Matt Ottinger

  • Member
  • Posts: 12442
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #9 on: July 05, 2003, 10:27:02 PM »
Quote
I have a feeling that if the quiz show scandals would have happened today, no one would care!
I'm afraid I agree with you.  Frankly, I think it's already happened.  A few years ago, there was an incredibly minor scandal in the talk show world when it was discovered that some of the guests that appeared on the shows (even the \"classier\" ones like Oprah) were just making stuff up and lying about their problems just to get on television.  It had become a game for them, and some had even been on multiple shows with different problems each time.

Critics said we could have another scandal similar to the quiz shows on our hands....and no one cared.

FOX promised that they'd be much more careful about screening future reality contestants after the Who Wants to Marry A Multimillionaire fiasco, and went on to pick a couple with children to play \"Temptation Island\" and an already married woman to play \"Married By America\".........and no one cared.

One final OT example that, in my mind, proves that the era of any kind of television standards is nearly over:  Last night, Comedy Central ran \"South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut\" -- a cartoon that flirted with an NC-17 rating for outrageous language and nearly pornographic visuals -- exactly as it aired in the theaters.  The only cuts were for commercial breaks.  I've been listening, and I haven't heard one peep of protest from the vast Moral Right that's supposed to be protecting us from this stuff.

OK, one more:  On the new TNN cartoon block, we're reminded every half hour that \"This show is rated CFFA: Cartoons For F**kin' Adults\".  In a climate where this kind of thing goes unchecked, who's going to care that some snotty nosed twentysomething got to play two reality games in the same year?
« Last Edit: July 05, 2003, 10:27:55 PM by Matt Ottinger »
This has been another installment of Matt Ottinger's Masters of the Obvious.
Stay tuned for all the obsessive-compulsive fun of Words Have Meanings.

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27200
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #10 on: July 06, 2003, 01:55:30 AM »
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jul 5 2003, 07:27 PM\'] Last night, Comedy Central ran "South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut" -- a cartoon that flirted with an NC-17 rating for outrageous language and nearly pornographic visuals -- exactly as it aired in the theaters. [/quote]
 I think, however, it should be pointed out that in no time zone did SP:BLU air prior to midnight, well past the accepted bedtime of anyone who maybe shouldn't be seeing that sort of stuff. In most time zones it doesn't air until 1, which means they have time to knock out an entire titty movie on Showtime or Skinemax before SP came on.

And, for that matter, if a parent thinks their kid shouldn't be seeing that sort of stuff, then perhaps said parent should take more of an interest in their child's TV viewing habits.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

Peter Sarrett

  • Member
  • Posts: 226
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #11 on: July 07, 2003, 04:28:58 AM »
Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with someone playing on multiple game/reality shows.  In fact, sign me up.  What's the big deal?  Why SHOULD anyone care?

  - Peter

zachhoran

  • Member
  • Posts: 0
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #12 on: July 07, 2003, 11:11:52 AM »
There is no big deal, although there are those people around here who collect data of contestants appearing on multiple shows.

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27200
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #13 on: July 07, 2003, 11:38:18 AM »
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jul 7 2003, 08:11 AM\'] There is no big deal, although there are those people around here who collect data of contestants appearing on multiple shows. [/quote]
 Those people, IMO, need to get out more.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

Jimmy Owen

  • Member
  • Posts: 7452
From the Dog Eat Dog followup file...
« Reply #14 on: July 07, 2003, 11:38:43 AM »
The shows have rules against the practice, so somebody must think it's important.  I think too the audience would get tired of seeing the same old (albeit photogenic) faces on these shows. Would a professional contestant have an unfair advantage over first time contestants?  All of the AI folks could go to Star Search.  The rejected suitors on \"The Batchelorette\" could become \"Mr. Personality.\" Meanwhile there people who want to get on the show who don't make the tryout just because the guy who made it lied about being on another show.  Maybe he could go on \"Cheaters.\"
Let's Make a Deal was the first show to air on Buzzr. 6/1/15 8PM.