The Game Show Forum > Game Show Channels & Networks

Guess This Puts A Crimp In GSN's Plans

<< < (3/3)

ChrisLambert!:
I kinda feel like it doesn't matter if GSN actually DOES this show or not; they've gotten tons of good publicity just from the announcement of the special, and I think if they just dropped the project it wouldn't hurt them a bit.

I'm probably wrong.

Fedya:
SRIV94 wrote:

--- Quote ---OK, now tell me why I'm an ignorant slut. :)
--- End quote ---

I've never considered you ignorant at all.  :-p

inturnaround:
[quote name=\'ChrisLambert!\' date=\'Sep 15 2003, 07:50 PM\'] I kinda feel like it doesn't matter if GSN actually DOES this show or not; they've gotten tons of good publicity just from the announcement of the special, and I think if they just dropped the project it wouldn't hurt them a bit.

I'm probably wrong. [/quote]
 There'd be no return on the investment. I'm sure some ad inventory has already been sold for the time slot carved out for the special and I'm sure a set is being designed and built. It's probably not an expensive show to make, so I'm sure it'll be a moneymaker for GSN, as well as a way of saying to the public that GSN is about now just about game shows, but about shows about games (especially the big game in California, the run for the power in Sacramento)

There's just no reason not to do it now.

As for the idea of it looking silly running 6 months from now, I'm sure it'll look silly when they tape the darn thing. It's not being done for C-SPAN. It's meant to be silly. The whole casting of the show screams that. The whole venue for the show screams that.

Look on the bright side, it'll be over before you know it. Take a deep breath, it'll only sting for a minute.

parliboy:
While I appreciate the idea that GSN needs to make contingency plans, I'm not holding by breath on that decision standing.  This is the ninth circuit, after all.  These are the guys that the activist judges run away from because they think they're weirdos.

They had 6 unanimous reversals against them last term.  This won't be unanimous, but it will be sent back down in a hurry.

In Bush v. Gore, there was a state-mandated recount taking place, instead of the voting and earlier recounts, which were done county-by-county, as California's gubernatorial recall will be counted.  What's more, understand that this decision could kill every upcoming election in the country.

Consider: In the state in which you live, does every county or parish use the same system for casting and tabulating ballots?  If not, then upholding this decision would have the national effect of mandating that every ballot in your state be cast the exact same way, regardless of cost and practicality, because it follows that any given balloting system is going to have its own built-in errors, and as such, using two different methods in any election will disenfranchise some of the voters.

Can you imagine the losers of every statewide election in every state saying, \"My voters were disenfranchised\" and having this decision and a subsequent refusal by the SC to back them up?  Chaos.

In short, well, I want some of what the justices involved in the injunction were smoking.

One side thing I'm curious about.  What will Peter Uberroth think, when he quit last week because \"there wasn't enough time to make up ground\" and they're now trying to push the election back another four months.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page