The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => Game Show Channels & Networks => Topic started by: CaseyAbell on July 29, 2007, 09:55:26 PM
-
The NYT (http://\"http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/business/media/30game.html?ref=business\") and MultiChannel (http://\"http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=talkbackCommentsFull&talk_back_header_id=6450790&articleid=CA6458112\") both ran similar stories about GSN recently, centered around Without Prejudice? but discussing the general challenges the network faces. The MC story made a funny error - guys, the casino block is on Monday, not Friday - but both highlight the tricky task of expanding GSN's demo reach without alienating the traditional game show audience.
Lots of Nielsen numbers dot the stories, and they're mostly bad for the network. The new talkfest did snag a 0.5 rating, but the general trend hasn't been encouraging. Can't blame the network for emphasizing interactivity because the TV operation alone hasn't been simmering with success. At least everybody seems to think the network is no longer running in the red. But as the NYT points out, Liberty no longer breaks out separate numbers for GSN in their financial reports.
The schedule in the MC story says High Stakes Poker starts its fourth season on August 27. It's become my favorite show on GSN. I guess I'm contributing to the show's non-typical appeal to male viewers.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' post=\'159017\' date=\'Jul 29 2007, 06:55 PM\']
centered around Without Prejudice? but discussing the general challenges the network faces.
[/quote]
I tell you, they're gonna face more challenges if they keep this turd on the air. My Tivo caught it the other day, and I was completely slack-jawed at how utterly OFFENSIVE the show is. They clearly stacked the panel so that they had a couple of out-and-out bigots dueling with a couple of minorities, and they clearly stacked the contestant pool so that the bigots would have something to go off on.
I made it two rounds, and the only reason the second round happened is because I was grilling and didn't turn off the Tivo.
I would truly enjoy spitting in the face of whatever GSN exec thought this was a good idea to greenlight.
-
Haven't seen much of the show, but it hardly made me want to spit in anybody's face. Seemed a little tepid to me after all I heard. Anyway, it got some decent numbers for GSN, which is different from most everything else they've tried lately.
-
ABC's surprise renewal of Bingo Night ought to catch the eye of the GSN people. It proves that there's more to a show -- or even an entire network -- than just the Nielsens. (I also continue to believe that the Neilsen samples aren't large enough to be meaningful in a zillion-channel universe, but that's an argument for a different thread.) QuizNation must be making a little money, and they're not wasting enormous amounts on colossal gambles (funny, tonight I was talking to a TV critic about their horseracing fiasco). Finding ways to make multiple platforms work financially might be the course to making GSN a reliably profitable operation.
-
I thought that the production team behind Quiznation went Chapter 11, and there's now a Brit-esque snafu (http://\"http://buzzerblog.flashgameshows.com/testing\") that could take it off the air entirely.
Since I feel that WP is supposed to be polarizing to begin with, I'm not too surprised with Chris' opinion. Also, since the basis of any story is conflict, what good is a panel with 5 open minds?
-
It won't take it off the air totally or at all. And honestly no one will even bother or care. I just think they handled the situation completely wrong and should have thrown out the game. Then again I don't even know why I care because I haven't even had a care to watch any of the late night shows in a few months, but I just thought it was interesting.
ABC's surprise renewal of Bingo Night
Hate to thread hi-jack, but I figured I'd bring this up to keep up with surprise ABC renewals. A contestant call for Set For Life went out on Craigslist today. (http://\"http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/tlg/384454330.html\") For now I'm choosing to believe this a mistake or for an Australian version (notice the email address), but it does link to the USA ABC application. I'll be calling them tomorrow to find out what's going on. If this show has been renewed, I'll just be in total and utter shock.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'159022\' date=\'Jul 29 2007, 08:09 PM\']
Since I feel that WP is supposed to be polarizing to begin with, I'm not too surprised with Chris' opinion.
[/quote]
Unsurprisingly, you miss my point. My point was not "OMG these people are bastards I HAVE to see what they do next," my point was "these people are so horrible that I don't WANT to watch them."
The only people I can see enjoying this show are people who agree with their bigoted, offensive opinions.
-
The only people I can see enjoying this show are people who agree with their bigoted, offensive opinions.
I have to disagree with this to some level because I do enjoy the show and I'm far from agreeing with a good deal of the panelists. The bad thing is that I just cannot put my finger quite on why I like it currently. Right now I think I'm almost just enjoying the shock factor. I'm like disagreeing with the people on the show I suppose. I like getting riled up by some of the completely idiotic statements that they make. It's a stupid reason for liking the show, but I do just for some reason. I guess I can call it more of a guilty pleasure than anything. A very guilty pleasure. A very very guilty pleasure. However, this is one show that I can easily see why people don't like it, and the people that do really don't have a ton of ground to tell the others "How can you not like people judging each other for no reason?"
-
[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'159025\' date=\'Jul 29 2007, 08:47 PM\']
I have to disagree with this to some level because I do enjoy the show
[/quote]
Well, there you go.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'159018\' date=\'Jul 29 2007, 10:06 PM\']
I tell you, they're gonna face more challenges if they keep this turd on the air. My Tivo caught it the other day, and I was completely slack-jawed at how utterly OFFENSIVE the show is. They clearly stacked the panel so that they had a couple of out-and-out bigots dueling with a couple of minorities, and they clearly stacked the contestant pool so that the bigots would have something to go off on.
[/quote]
You're f'in kidding me, right? That's wrong on so many levels.
-
I liked the part in the Multichannel article where they describe Dr. Robi Ludwig as "a psycho therapist."
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'159037\' date=\'Jul 30 2007, 05:50 AM\']
You're f'in kidding me, right? That's wrong on so many levels.
[/quote]
'Fraid not. The partial episode I saw had one contestant (a black man...yes, it shouldn't be relevant, but stay with me) who had more piercings than a dartboard, and a woman who started out as a man.
The panel had two people who had no problems saying that they didn't like either one based solely on those factors, and the deal was sealed for Piercing Boy when he mentioned that his girlfriend was white, which got a third panelist to start banging the table about interracial relationships. That was where my tolerance for this crap ended.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'159050\' date=\'Jul 30 2007, 08:35 AM\']
I liked the part in the Multichannel article where they describe Dr. Robi Ludwig as "a psycho therapist."
[/quote]
Well, you're certainly in no danger of seeing her described as "a talented host." She was AWFUL. She made Rolf Benirshke look relaxed.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'159054\' date=\'Jul 30 2007, 10:44 AM\']
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'159050\' date=\'Jul 30 2007, 08:35 AM\']
I liked the part in the Multichannel article where they describe Dr. Robi Ludwig as "a psycho therapist."
[/quote]
Well, you're certainly in no danger of seeing her described as "a talented host." She was AWFUL. She made Rolf Benirshke look relaxed.
[/quote]
But it's kind of fun to see a psychologist look rattled.
I haven't sat through a whole episode either, but if the whole thing centers on bigots arguing with other people, it'll get tired really fast.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'159052\' date=\'Jul 30 2007, 10:43 AM\']
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'159037\' date=\'Jul 30 2007, 05:50 AM\']
You're f'in kidding me, right? That's wrong on so many levels.
[/quote]
The panel had two people who had no problems saying that they didn't like either one based solely on those factors, and the deal was sealed for Piercing Boy when he mentioned that his girlfriend was white, which got a third panelist to start banging the table about interracial relationships. That was where my tolerance for this crap ended.
[/quote]
It seems like those of you who dislike the show are afraid of knowing the truth of this country and our society.
I think the reason why GSN decided to air this show was for a good reason. They are showing this (rathar extreme) side of people to show them that are truly ARE people like this out there, and is giving people the opportunities to evaluate their opinions. I'm kind of glad they joined up with a couple of organizations to help people cope with this.
At least some network on TV is trying to help save our social world from collapsing tomorrow. It's a shame they aren't getting ratings, otherwise they could reach a bigger audience if they were a network station.
-
Jonathan, I understand where you're coming from, but that doesn't make the show right.
Yes, the mentalities Chris described still exist in 2007...but does that make it right, esp. in this supposedly more diverse society, where everyone talks about being "equal"? The premise of the show, from what I've read, the show offers a $25,000 grand prize to one person (out of what, five?), and the panelists debate based on each contestant's characteristics, why they do or don't deserve the $25-large.
I do have a major problem with the scenario Chris described. Yeah, GSN was going for water-cooler discussion, but to try to center a game show around it, you're waiting for crap to hit the fan. I have no problem with the premise, as a talk show, but to have folks competing for cash and then some elitist get on their high horse and deny someone the money because they don't like up to your standards strikes a nerve with me.
GSN needs to stick to the light-hearted stuff like Lingo and Whammy!
-
[quote name=\'johnnyd1788\' post=\'159172\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 12:29 AM\']
It seems like those of you who dislike the show are afraid of knowing the truth of this country and our society.
[/quote]
No, chief, let me tell you, I'm WELL aware.
I think the reason why GSN decided to air this show was for a good reason.
To make money? Financially, sure, a good reason, but if you really think there is something altruistic in GSN putting this on the air, you're more naive than I thought. And that's saying something.
They are showing this (rathar extreme) side of people to show them that are truly ARE people like this out there, and is giving people the opportunities to evaluate their opinions.
What a load of CRAP.
They're not trying to "raise awareness" of anything. They are trying to get people to watch the show, no more, no less. They are using these people to get ratings, by either exploiting the shock value of what assholes they are, or getting some slack-jawed moron to say "hey, here's a show where they make fun of people who are different from me, this is GREAT!"
Trust me, they're not opening any eyes here, they're opening wallets.
-
[quote name=\'johnnyd1788\' post=\'159172\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 03:29 AM\']
At least some network on TV is trying to help save our social world from collapsing tomorrow.
[/quote]
This may be, hands down, the dumbest statement I've read on this forum in some time, and that includes crap spewed from Witch, Karlberg, and Henke.
-
I heard a 60-second ad for this show on the radio today.
Ugh.
-
[quote name=\'johnnyd1788\' post=\'159172\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 12:29 AM\']It seems like those of you who dislike the show are afraid of knowing the truth of this country and our society.[/quote] If there was any indication that you were capable of having a rational discussion about things, I'd be willing to indulge you. Having not seen that, I'll carry on with the other members. If you do want to debate, I'll happily pull apart each and every one of your points.
My worry is not about holding up a mirror to the country. I listen to the AM radio for seven hours of the day. (I would make it eight, but Ron Reagan has zero personality, so I skip his hour) I don't need to be told about what asshats some people can be. There's no reason to belabor the point about how destructive the show is. My problem is more that this sort of behavior is going to be reinforced, and Joe No-Teeth in Yeehaw, Alabama is going to see this and think that his prejudices are OK. That's the danger: not "learning the truth about society."
And one other thing: it's clear that the show is stacked in such a way that the pairings are stacked. How interesting would it be to have five WASPy guys determining which of five other WASPy guys was going to win? Not very. The conflict is inherent and manufactured.
-
When I was reading the review for Without Prejudice, one of the articles stated that the show had "typical reality show casting". I will admit that tonight's show is a little better than last week's, but it seems like they have to include one bigoted person on each panel because the producers think that makes great television.
I wonder what the casting for the panel was like for the British series?
-
Frankly, after what I heard about the show, I was expecting Springerish screaming and fistfights. Instead, things seemed pretty calm and lukewarm and downright meandering when I watched. Maybe I missed the best bits, I don't know. This NYT review (http://\"http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/arts/television/17hale.html?ex=1342324800&en=807f3f3640de12ac&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss\") seems dead-on to me, especially the "rambling all-night conversations about race and sex" comment. Ramble on, little doggies, ramble on.
-
I agree that it's a departure from GSN's usual stuff, but it's an interesting show with a sense of direction and purpose.
-
[quote name=\'spokesmodelintraining\' post=\'159413\' date=\'Aug 2 2007, 12:47 PM\']
but it's an interesting show with a sense of direction and purpose.
[/quote]
If you enjoy seeing the very worst aspects of humanity, sure.
-
[quote name=\'spokesmodelintraining\' post=\'159413\' date=\'Aug 2 2007, 03:47 PM\']
I agree that it's a departure from GSN's usual stuff, but it's an interesting show with a sense of direction and purpose.[/quote]
I'm not sure about the "purpose" being anything more than to attract an audience, but otherwise I agree with you. It may turn some people off (heck, it turns me off), but it's good for the network in that it gets people talking ("Have you seen that show...?") and is highly promotable. It's probably strong in the young-folks demographics as well. Compared to the expensive boondoggles of the past (could we PLEASE have another season of American Dream Derby?), this is a low-risk, high-profile effort for them.
-
My girlfriend and I TiVoed the 90-minute premiere, and were both very interested in seeing it. By the 60-minute mark, we were talking to each other more than we were paying attention to the screen, and toward the end, she summed the experience up well with "You know, this is actually pretty boring." (The show, not me. Er, I hope.) I won't be watching again; not because I took offense at any sensationalistic stereotyping, but because I just found the whole experience rather dull.
I can sum this show up best as people I don't care about talking about other people I don't care about who are all giving me no reason whatsoever to care about them.
If it helps GSN's bottom line and keeps the network chugging, hey, great. But I'd rather watched deeply-flawed shells of games like Chain Reaction and Camouflage, which at least give me a play-along factor as an incentive to watch.
-
Very much agreed that the show is often dull and uninvolving. It's nice that GSN got a decent number for the premiere, but I don't see this lasting unless they all-out Springerize it. Which I don't think they'll do. GSN is just too p.c. for that. The network has even gone hat-in-hand to various interest groups to make sure they're not offended.
Not to mention that the traditional game show audience will probably like this show as much as a root canal.