The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: brianhenke on December 01, 2006, 03:37:31 PM
-
The worldwide rights to Who Wants to be a Millionaire? have been sold for 106 million pounds (that's over 209 million dollars!):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6198424.stm (http://\"http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6198424.stm\")
Brian
The 1988 Winter Olympics were held in Thunder Bay, Ontario?
-
Unsurprisingly, Brian neglects to mention that the GBP$106M is paying for a package of shows, and not just Millionaire. Certainly Millionaire was the crown jewel, but still.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'139263\' date=\'Dec 1 2006, 03:12 PM\']
Unsurprisingly, Brian neglects to mention that the GBP$106M is paying for a package of shows, and not just Millionaire. Certainly Millionaire was the crown jewel, but still.
[/quote]
And it should be noted that 2waytraffic, which was founded by the Endemol guys who created "Big Brother," seems to be more interested in the interactive call-in-and-lose model of game show programming than anything else.
They do have a division called Intellygents that does deal in traditional game and reality programming. They're the company responsible for "That's the Question"--don't know if they were responsible for the bad writing in the U.S. version (from what I've read here--haven't seen the show yet).
And Celador will still be around, but in the movie business (the Oscar-nominated "Dirty Pretty Things," written by one of "WWTBAM"'s creators, "The Descent") and UK radio (they're trying to get licenses for stations aimed at an over-35 audience--what an interesting concept).
The 2waytraffic web site:
http://www.2waytraffic.com (http://\"http://www.2waytraffic.com\")
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'139274\' date=\'Dec 1 2006, 02:05 PM\']
The 2waytraffic web site:
http://www.2waytraffic.com (http://\"http://www.2waytraffic.com\")
[/quote]
What's interesting about that site is that the format for "Last One Standing" mentions GSN under "track record". Is this something I missed?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'139275\' date=\'Dec 1 2006, 04:18 PM\']
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'139274\' date=\'Dec 1 2006, 02:05 PM\']
The 2waytraffic web site:
http://www.2waytraffic.com (http://\"http://www.2waytraffic.com\")
[/quote]
What's interesting about that site is that the format for "Last One Standing" mentions GSN under "track record". Is this something I missed?
[/quote]
Pilot?
-
I know that other shows besides WWTBAM was part of the package, but since WWTBAM is the most well-known to most of you, I decided not to mention the shows in my original post.
Brian
The Jehovah's Witnesses distribute Mad magazine? (BTW, last weekend they came here and distributed a pamphlet called "THE END OF FALSE RELIGION IS NEAR!")
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'139276\' date=\'Dec 1 2006, 02:29 PM\']
Pilot?
[/quote]
Didn't say it was, though. And they did mention when other formats were done as pilots as opposed to whole serii.
[quote name=\'brianhenke\' post=\'139279\' date=\'Dec 1 2006, 02:47 PM\']
I know that other shows besides WWTBAM was part of the package, but since WWTBAM is the most well-known to most of you, I decided not to mention the shows in my original post.
[/quote]
Making your summary statement factually incorrect, and cementing your status as an utter moron.
-
This was brought up a few months ago, and just now it's official? What took so long? Was it the Mr. Sour Grapes dude that thought he had first crack?
-
[quote name=\'brianhenke\' post=\'139279\' date=\'Dec 1 2006, 05:47 PM\']
The Jehovah's Witnesses distribute Mad magazine? (BTW, last weekend they came here and distributed a pamphlet called "THE END OF FALSE RELIGION IS NEAR!")
[/quote]
Your point being?
(Not to mention the fact that you still can't do a proper sig)
-
[quote name=\'brianhenke\' post=\'139279\' date=\'Dec 1 2006, 05:47 PM\']
I know that other shows besides WWTBAM was part of the package, but since WWTBAM is the most well-known to most of you, I decided not to mention the shows in my original post.
[/quote]
Brian, all you had to do was to note that other shows were included in the package and that Millionaire was the best known. A full list wasn't necessary, but refusing to mention that the other shows even existed made your post false.
We have a long-standing rule on this forum that people may not post information that they know is false. People who ignore that rule tend not to last too long around here.
-
OK, I will say that C4's You Are What You Eat was also in the package. Sorry for any confusion.
Brian
Stevie Nicks is a country singer?
-
but refusing to mention that the other shows even existed made your post false.
I wouldn't be so quick to call his post false when the BBC headline reads as follows:
£106m deal for Millionaire rights
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'139331\' date=\'Dec 2 2006, 09:20 AM\']
but refusing to mention that the other shows even existed made your post false.
I wouldn't be so quick to call his post false when the BBC headline reads as follows:
£106m deal for Millionaire rights
[/quote]
Well, except that he had more than the headline to work with. He admitted that he read the story and knew that other shows were included, but chose not to mention their existence.
I don't know that it was his intent to be deceptive; I've said before that I question his ability to form that specific intent in the first place. That doesn't mean that he shouldn't try to get it right, something he has demonstrated an ability to do when he feels like it.
-
Well, except that he had more than the headline to work with. He admitted that he read the story and knew that other shows were included, but chose not to mention their existence.
He posted a link to the BBC story and as far as I'm concerned that's sufficient. To take a minor error of omission and persecute the guy, accusing him of posting "false" information, is wrong. I doubt you would be so accusatory had the error been made by a more respected member.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'139532\' date=\'Dec 4 2006, 03:08 PM\']
Well, except that he had more than the headline to work with. He admitted that he read the story and knew that other shows were included, but chose not to mention their existence.
He posted a link to the BBC story and as far as I'm concerned that's sufficient. To take a minor error of omission and persecute the guy, accusing him of posting "false" information, is wrong. I doubt you would be so accusatory had the error been made by a more respected member.
[/quote]
I don't know of any more respected member here who would deliberately leave out specific details that made the subject of his post false. (Accidentally, sure, but Brian admitted that it wasn't an accident.) As I said, all Brian would have had to do is to say something like "a group of shows that included Millionaire" or "Millionaire and some other shows you've probably never heard of" or the like.
And again, I don't think that Brian's intent was to deceive, which is why I called his post false rather than a lie. But after having dealt with Adam Kleist -- not to mention several GSN board members who routinely traffic in "facts" that aren't and are ticked that we hold people to a higher standard here -- I don't want there to be even a suggestion that we approve of people posting information that they know isn't true. Perhaps my tone could have been better, but I think that to let it pass entirely without comment or a warning would have constituted special treatment.
(Memo to the people who have told me in email that I do Chris's bidding and/or he does mine, and to anyone else who shares that sentiment: do you still think that? :-)
-
As I said, all Brian would have had to do is to say something like "a group of shows that included Millionaire" or "Millionaire and some other shows you've probably never heard of" or the like.
Look, this isn't the New York Times. Again, Brian's post is not false on its face because 2waytraffic did put up 106 million pounds and they did get the rights to Millionaire in return, and that is precisely how the BBC headline was written. You're basically accusing the BBC of publishing false information.
One fact that everyone is overlooking is that Chris Pye is involved in the deal. Someone with a copy of EOTVGS at hand can tell us which U.S. shows he has worked on.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'139553\' date=\'Dec 4 2006, 07:42 PM\']
As I said, all Brian would have had to do is to say something like "a group of shows that included Millionaire" or "Millionaire and some other shows you've probably never heard of" or the like.
Look, this isn't the New York Times. Again, Brian's post is not false on its face because 2waytraffic did put up 106 million pounds and they did get the rights to Millionaire in return, and that is precisely how the BBC headline was written. You're basically accusing the BBC of publishing false information.
[/quote]
The BBC headline was written that way, but the article was not. I'm sure none of us has seen a misleading headline in our lifetimes. :-) If Brian had read just the headline before reporting it that way it would have been understandable, but he read the whole article and still reported it that way.
I think it's time to end this before we get into a discussion of whether the BBC or the NY Times is less credible. (IMO the reputed words of Yogi Berra say it best: "Seven of one, half dozen of the other." :-P)
One fact that everyone is overlooking is that Chris Pye is involved in the deal. Someone with a copy of EOTVGS at hand can tell us which U.S. shows he has worked on.
Per IMDB, if it's the same Chris Pye he was involved in the legendary Games People Play.